FAIR Programme An Assessment of the IMPACT of the EU FAIR Agri-Food Research Programme 1994 - 1998

Final Report March 2002 Preface

The report is prefaced by the following remarks made by Bruno Hansen the (then) Director of Directorate E of DG Research.

This accompanying measure 'IMPACT - Monitoring Progress Towards Achievements of the Objectives of the FAIR-Programme (Framework 4)' was supported by the European Commission Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources Programme Key Action I food. Nutrition and Health, which is part of the 5th Framework Programme for Research.

The FAIR-Programme allowed us to support research aiming at improving the competitive position of the European food industry along with discovering a better understanding of the role of food in improving the general health and well-being of the European consumer. It was the driving force in paving the way towards the development of new technologies, demonstrating their capabilities, and the different applications of biotechnology in food processing and crop breeding so as to open new horizons for the future production of a range of new raw materials for specific nutritional requirements. Recent concerns on food safety have further underlined yet again the importance of carrying out this public research at European level to benefit consumers, industry and regulations at the same time.

This Report outlines the detailed results on the outputs of FAIR-Projects in relation to scientific achievements; technology transfer including exploitation; European policies; consumers: training; effective project management as well as dissemination activities; and possible success stories.

A facilitated workshop methodology was developed and implemented based on active commitments from numerous FAIR participants. In addition, a broad range of stakeholders from different Commission Services. consumers, national administrations, and industries from Europe and world wide were actively involved to gauge the impact and up-take of the research results. Also, the subsequent careers of some of the young scientists supported by the FAIR-Programme were tracked. The main findings and key issues generated, indicated that almost without exception FAIR-Projects, were pushing the scientific knowledge substantially forward, patents were often filed, and new products and processes were or are currently being anticipated. This is encouraging as it shows that the FAIR-Programmes approach and objectives were correctly set.

A number of projects catalysed on-going discussions and contributed to different European Policies in the areas of food nutrition and safety while consumer issues were equally addressed, highlighted and prepared the ground for increased specific research activities towards consumer sciences.

The current Key Action I on Food, Nutrition and Health within the Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources Programme has taken up this issue and consequently generated a number of targeted research projects in this emerging scientific field by studying consumer trust and preparing a consumer consensus platform. However, despite all the efforts to bridge the gap between science and its technological implementation by demonstration projects, some shortfalls have occurred here. Commercial restructuring and changes in company's strategic directions was found to affect commitment and interest from industrial partners. A greater use of the internet to both disseminate and access relevant scientific results needs to be further explored and developed. Consequently, the 6th Framework Programme (FP6) and the European Research Area (ERA) will be using integrated projects and networks of excellence as new instruments to allow for a direct integration of science, its technological implementation and dissemination of results by involving all relevant stakeholders.

Recommendations

These are of relevance and interest even though this report dealt with the agri-food sector. As indicated below the authors suggest a wide dissemination of the results, and Biomatnet is happy to assist with this activity. Second, many of the recommendations would appear equally relevant to non-food projects, especially those aspects covering administration and monitoring. Some of the more pertinent recommendations are as follows:

• The IMPACT evaluation methodology, and an overview of the output of the FAIR portfolio established in this Accompanying Measure should be widely disseminated. This generic methodology may have wider application for assessment of collaborative R&D projects, and will, we hope, be helpful to others concerned with the review and monitoring of Commission sponsored R&D.
• The Commission should follow up the success stories identified in this Accompanying Measure with a view to wide dissemination of the results.
• The Commission should formally reassure itself that air participants in a project share a common understanding of the project aims, objectives and expected outcomes.
• Our Study gave strong support for the need for a more pro-active monitoring function.
• For all new projects, the Scientific Officer should, at the outset, lead a short Workshop concerned with management issues. In particular the senior members of the Consortium or Management Committee should be made aware of the importance of the 'process factors'
• We recommend that development of a more strategic, foresight-type Network of Excellence, involving a broad mix of food industry professionals, regulators and academic actors, allied with a range of environmental and consumer specialists. The involvement of young people, and multi-disciplinary training initiatives should be a central feature of the proposed Network.
• The 'Knowledge Network Highway Analysis' (one of the techniques applied in the report) has generated considerable interest. The analysis demonstrates the strong connectivity between different actors in food science and technology R&D within the EU. It should be applied to the projects and collaborations of KA I (Food Health and Nutrition) of Framework 5 as input to Framework 6.
• It is suggested that a Network Analysis applied to Key Action I of Framework 5 could both identify existing and emerging networks in different areas (e.g., food safety, consumer studies) and could be of considerable value in helping the integration of appropriate groups from the Accession Countries into the European Food R&D community.
• It is suggested that the Commission establish an electronic e-print archive for all non-confidential documents, reports. preprints of scientific papers and published patents associated with commissioned research in the Domain of Food Science and Technology. The Commission should further insist that all recipients of Commission funds should deposit all appropriate material on this site.