(GXFDWLRQWUDLQLQJDQGUHVHDUFKLQWKH NQRZOHGJHVRFLHW\

Transcription

1 63((&+ 9LYLDQH5HGLQJ Member of the European Commission responsible for Education and Culture (GXFDWLRQWUDLQLQJDQGUHVHDUFKLQWKH NQRZOHGJHVRFLHW\ Academic symposium of the European Federation of National Engineering Associations (FEANI) /X[HPERXUJ6HSWHPEHU

2 It is a great pleasure for me to take part in today s academic symposium to mark the 50th anniversary of the European Federation of National Engineering Associations, founded in Luxembourg in 1951, and I would like to thank you for inviting me to attend. Allow me, first of all, to congratulate you for having once again chosen to hold an event of this kind in the lovely city of Luxembourg and, secondly, to thank your Federation for giving the engineering profession a European dimension. Engineering has always been at the forefront of change both as a catalyst and as a vehicle for new developments. In the past, engineers were responsible for mines, bridges and highways; today, they are key players in the telecommunications, computing and electronics industries. You, Ladies and Gentlemen, are the ones who will be given the task of exploring the fields of robotics, new materials and biotechnologies; of revealing their potential and of defining their limits and the challenges they present whether in social, economic, cultural or ethical terms. I firmly believe that the European dimension which your Federation gives to the engineering profession can only help you meet the challenges with which you are constantly faced and answer the questions asked of you. However, if you will allow me, I would like to return later to some of the problems faced by your profession and talk about how the Commission might be able to help you find appropriate solutions. $NQRZOHGJHEDVHGVRFLHW\ As I have just mentioned, the engineering profession which has always been an architect of change has had an important role to play in our society, particularly in the progressive shift from an agricultural to an industrial society; at the dawn of the third millennium, it will likewise have a prominent role to play in the transition to a knowledge-based society. Nowadays, real wealth - in terms of economic performance, industrial competitiveness and employment - does not come from the production of material goods alone, but from the production of knowledge (through research), the transmission of knowledge (through education and training) and the exploitation of knowledge (through innovation). Aware of the crucial social and economic impact of the "knowledge-based society" on European integration and concerned that the European Union was losing ground to its direct competitors, the Portuguese Presidency decided to convene an extraordinary meeting of the European Council in Lisbon on 23 and 24 March At the meeting, the Council put forward an ambitious strategy for change, seeking to ensure that, by 2010, the European Union becomes "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". I decided to quote this text in its entirety, as I believe that each word is worth its weight in gold. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the European Council decided to take stock each spring of the economic and social issues relating to a "Europe of Knowledge". As you will appreciate, this new working method represents a fundamental change in the way European integration is carried out. Allow me briefly to underline the distinguishing feature of this summit: it served to introduce "Europe of Knowledge" as a major new project for the EU in the wake of 2

3 the projects to create a single market and a single currency; as a result, it made research, education, training, innovation and new technologies new strategic objectives for the Union. The European Council observed: that "Knowledge" today accounts for more than 50% of GDP in the industrialised countries; that investment in knowledge is responsible for between 30 and 50% of economic knowledge; that the knowledge-based society will have an impact on all aspects of life for ordinary people. The European Council also noted that investment in "Knowledge" was insufficient and not properly targeted, with the result that the EU was falling increasingly behind its competitors. In fact, it has been calculated that the USA invests 9% of GDP in "Knowledge", the EU 7.6% and Japan 6.5%. And the gap is continuing to widen. Allow me now to turn to the main problems faced by the three core sectors which comprise the "knowledge-based society": first, research; secondly, new information technologies; and, thirdly, education and training. 5HVHDUFK More than ever before, research is proving to be both a driving force behind economic and social development and a key factor in business competitiveness, employment and the quality of life. So far, however, the Union has not adopted a research policy as such. In fact, the national research policies of the 15 Member States exist alongside each other and with a Community programme (accounting for 5% of public spending) which does not do enough to coordinate these policies so that they are organised and used effectively. The research sector in Europe is currently faced with three major problems: (1) Overall investment is insufficient and not properly targeted. In 1999, for example, the EU invested 1.8% of GDP in research, compared with 2.7% in the USA and 3.1% in Japan. This is due, in particular, to the fact that: research policies and activities in Europe are compartmentalised: 80% of the work is done within the national systems, which are fairly independent of each other; European universities and research centres have less pulling power than their US counterparts. (2) When it comes to the demand for human resources, the figures speak for themselves: in the EU, there are 5.1 researchers per people in employment, as against 7.4 per in the USA and 8.9 in Japan. The difference is even more marked when one looks at researchers in the business sector: 2.5 per employees compared with 7 in the USA and 6.3 in Japan. (3)The number of patents granted by the three patent offices (in Europe, the USA and Japan) per million inhabitants is 32 in the EU, 49 in the USA and 88 in Japan. 3

4 However, Europe clearly has a lot of strengths when it comes to producing highquality research. It has: undeniable intellectual potential; a long historical tradition; a solid infrastructure with regard to public and private research; a wide variety of schools and academic traditions; an outstanding record in various fields; and there are encouraging signs that European companies are launching initiatives in some fields of high technology. It is therefore something of a paradox that, although Europe has real potential, we are lagging worryingly behind our competitors in various fields. As a result, we owe it to ourselves to marshal Europe s resources, stimulate cooperation and bring the research policies of the EU Member States into line with each other. With this in mind, the Commission has proposed setting up a "European Research Area". This will be implemented through the Sixth RTD Framework Programme ( ), which will have the following objectives: creating and maintaining a pool of qualified researchers and promoting innovation with a view to fostering scientific skills and competence in Europe; giving science a European dimension and making Europe more attractive to researchers who have gone abroad, particularly to the USA, in order to finish their studies. Half of them continue to work in the USA five years after obtaining their degree. It is nice to know, for instance, that 30% of the companies in Silicon Valley were set up by non-americans; putting a stop to overlaps and fragmentation in the work of European researchers. It was decided at the Lisbon summit that the European Research Area should be in place by the end of the present decade. Let us make sure that we rise to the challenge. 5ROHRIQHZLQIRUPDWLRQWHFKQRORJLHVLQWKHNQRZOHGJHEDVHGVRFLHW\ It is now generally accepted that new information technologies are the prime motive force behind new economic activities and an important factor in growth. Yet these technologies, while promoting prosperity and helping to combat poverty and social exclusion, can also widen the gap between those who have the knowhow and those who do not. Some new products and services based on new technologies are still difficult to use and are out of reach for many people, with the result that they create a so-called "digital divide". Currently, approximately 420 million people regularly use the Internet i.e. around 7% of the global population. Of these 7%, 95% live in the OECD countries, with 175 million in the USA, 130 million in Europe and 43 million in Japan. By 2005, more than a billion people will be "on-line", whereas more than 2 billion men and women will still be without access to a telephone. 4

5 In Tokyo alone, there are more telephone lines than in the entire continent of Africa and there is more Internet activity in London than in Africa as a whole. It is up to all of us to seek to ensure that the technological revolution does not widen the gap between the rich and poor countries but instead becomes an important factor in the fight against poverty. Coming back to the topic of the industrialised countries, I have realised that although we Europeans have some of the best education systems in the world and the necessary investment capacity, we are still lagging behind other countries, particularly the USA, in the use of new information and communication technologies. Our shortcomings, which vary from country to country, concern the ICT infrastructure and the degree to which teachers and trainers are familiar with ICT tools. The EU will be unable to realise the goal it has set itself - namely, to create the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world within the next 10 years - unless everyone has access to new information technologies. The global NIT sector currently has an annual turnover of EUR billion, while the European sector employs over 12 million people. The Union s role as a provider of new information technologies should therefore be strengthened, because the Union s trade deficit in this sector stands at around EUR 28 billion - for a European market of around EUR 500 million - and is increasing by 12% each year. (OHDUQLQJ The Commission has proposed an e-learning programme which seeks to make up for these shortcomings and meet the objectives set by the Lisbon summit by mobilising the education, business and social sectors. The e-learning programme also aims to bring all the Commission s ICT activities as regards education and training under one roof and to promote the cohesion of all the measures taken in Europe. The e-learning initiative covers specific measures such as: ensuring that all schools have Internet access by the end of 2001 and all classrooms by the end of 2002, so that there will be one computer for every 5 to 15 pupils by 2004; providing as many teachers as possible with training in NIT by the end of bearing in mind that over 50% of them are over the age of 45; ensuring that all school-leavers are digitally literate by the end of 2003; offering every member of the public, by the end of 2002, the chance to become digitally literate through lifelong learning; adapting school curricula and radically overhauling the different learning structures. A considerable proportion of the working population does not have any ICT skills. It is estimated that around 1.4 million workers are in this position - a figure that is forecast to rise to 1.7 million by Urgent action must therefore be taken to step up investment in this area. 5

6 Without having to create new budgetary resources, the Commission will seek to achieve these objectives through the programmes and funds it has set up. These include: the education and training programmes; the framework programme for research and development; the structural funds; and the programmes on technology deployment. The European Investment Bank, for its part, will make a phenomenal EUR 15 billion available for the e-learning programme - even more than for the pre-enlargement process. The Member States will be encouraged to use their allocations from the structural funds and other investments. Where public revenue was previously invested in motorway networks, it will now be used increasingly to finance the infrastructure required in the knowledge-based society. By focussing all its efforts on the development of new information technologies, Europe should be able to boost industrial competitiveness and give all its citizens the opportunity to benefit from the development of the knowledge-based society. However, simply increasing investment is not enough to ensure that the Union has a pool of highly qualified labour. We must overhaul our education systems in order to bring them into line with the requirements of the knowledge-based society. %DVLFWUDLQLQJ It is now no longer enough to simply ensure that everyone has access to education. We have to ensure that young people leave compulsory education with a level of training which will enable them to go on to undertake further training leading to qualifications. As well as the traditional basic skills of reading, writing and arithmetic, the knowledge-based society requires that new skills are acquired in a context of lifelong learning, particularly in the fields of ICT, languages, technological culture, entrepreneurship and social skills (autonomy, ability to communicate, teamwork). But currently more than 20% of young people leave school without these skills, which means they do not have the grounding required for further training and are therefore excluded from the knowledge-based society. This is a real challenge which we must win because it is an essential condition for social inclusion. This basic training is also essential because Europe must face up to a significant shortage of skills which is slowing down growth and employment. If the European Union wants to achieve the Lisbon objectives, it will have to catch up with its main competitors in at least three areas: 6

7 WKH³JDS LQHPSOR\PHQW The employment rate in Europe is 10 percentage points lower than the United States % compared to 72%. Whilst employment rates are equivalent for men aged between 25 and 54, there are significant differences in those for women (52.6% in the Union compared to more than 65% in the United States) and for older workers (less than 40% in Europe and more than 60% in the United States). There is thus a whole pool of human resources in the Union which is untapped. the gap in education and training 80% of the technology used today will be out of date in ten years time. Bearing in mind the combined effect of the speed of technological change and the ageing of the Union s population, priority must be given to training the workforce, including unemployed people. Furthermore, European workers receive less than half the amount of continuing incompany training as their American counterparts (34% for the United States compared to 16% for the EU). WKH³JDS LQPRELOLW\ Mobility in Europe is between four and six times lower than in the United States. In fact, each year only 0.5% of European workers decide to go and work in another Member State, compared to 2-3% in the United States (from one state to another). It is limited by a large number of obstacles (access to information about rights, language and cultural barriers, recognition of qualifications and diplomas, administrative obstacles, transferability of supplementary pensions, etc.). The Union and its Member States are facing two main challenges: developing lifelong learning in order to be able to meet the needs of the labour market and to combat the skills deficits and bottlenecks; strengthening cohesion in our societies, i.e. preventing the emergence of a dual society (with two-speed labour markets) between those who can work in the knowledge-based society and those who are excluded. 3ULRULW\DFWLRQV To develop lifelong learning the Commission has launched a debate around its memorandum on lifelong learning, which will be followed up with an action plan before the end of the year. This action plan will aim to propose concrete activities in order to make lifelong learning a reality for everyone. 7

8 To remove obstacles to mobility: we need to set up, from 2002, a more harmonised skills system, to facilitate the recognition of skills acquired at work, to support transnational qualification systems, to draw up an action plan for lifelong learning and to support best practice in training. Removing obstacles to mobility will primarily concern tax systems, social benefits, supplementary pensions, and the mobility of students, researchers and teachers. It will also involve providing better information for those interested in mobility in Europe by creating a one-stop information site. This site, which would form the basis of a network, could develop information from Community and national sources. Finally, mobility involves recognising professional skills. 6KRUWDJHRI\RXQJSHRSOHDQGSDUWLFXODUO\\RXQJZRPHQLQVFLHQFHDQG WHFKQRORJ\FDUHHUV In the majority of our countries, that it is increasingly difficult to recruit young students and particularly young women onto science and technology courses. It is time to sound the alarm. Europe must react and develop an attractive policy for science subjects, including of course for the engineering profession. The education and research ministers held an informal meeting on 2 and 3 March 2001 at the initiative of the Swedish Presidency in order to study the various aspects of young people s lack of interest in scientific subjects in general. They agreed to take or support a series of initiatives to foster interest in these subjects, for example: to adapt science courses to the age bracket of students; to give children a taste of these courses from primary school level, as most children have a natural interest in sciences (machines, science fiction, robots). We only have to observe their dexterity when handling the different electronic gadgets which leave us adults literally dumbfounded; to improve laboratory equipment in schools; to encourage researchers themselves to come down from their ivory towers and to go into schools and talk to young people. We only have to observe the impact which Professor Jacquart made in his meetings with young people. Similarly, you, ladies and gentlemen - men and women with important responsibilities in the different economic sectors - you should devote a bit of your precious time to conveying the scientific and human richness of your professions. You as professionals, and we as politicians, have to work together to convey these messages. We must also encourage as many people as possible to undertake higher education. We should be aware that in the European Union only 23% of young people aged are in higher education, compared to 39% in the United States. Finally, we should also increase the number of doctoral students (currently a year, which should be increased to if we want the Union to have a highly qualified workforce). We should not forget that the average age of scientists is higher than the average age of the population. In France, for example, nearly half of researchers will have retired in ten years time. 8

9 Finally, women are underrepresented in science careers in Europe. Although half of people completing higher education are women, fewer than 10% of them are university professors. Women are also underrepresented in science and technology careers, with the rate being approximately 20% in the majority of our countries. 7KHHQJLQHHULQJSURIHVVLRQ To conclude, I would like to talk about you and to deal with certain aspects of the engineering profession which have or should have a European dimension, such as training (structure and content), accreditation, lifelong learning, etc. But firstly, I would like to tell you how pleasantly surprised I was when I talked with my staff about your profession and found out that you are true pioneers in how you organise your studies, assess content and recognise qualifications. The best and most concrete example has been provided by your Federation in creating the qualification of European Engineer. I really must congratulate you on this! First of all, I was surprised by the number of European organisations, associations and working groups in your profession. These include: 6(), (XURSHDQ 6RFLHW\ IRU (QJLQHHULQJ (GXFDWLRQ ZKLFK LV D ZRUNLQJ JURXS IRU promoting engineering studies for women. This group has organised meetings for young women in order to encourage them to take scientific studies; WKHXQLYHUVLW\FRRSHUDWLRQQHWZRUNV CLUSTER (Consortium Linking Universities of Science and Technology for Education and Research) CESAER (Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research) DEDHEE (Socrates thematic network: Development of a European Dimension in Higher Engineering Education); DVVHVVPHQWDQGDFFUHGLWDWLRQ(62(3((XURSHDQ6WDQGLQJ2EVHUYDWRU\IRUWKH Engineering Profession and Education. The Commission considers all these initiatives to be fine examples of good practice in training at European level. Initial training Finally, the organisation of engineering studies is characterised by a high degree of similarity between the different European training systems (a short cycle (3 years) which is more practical and a long cycle (5 years) which is more academic). This similarity stems from the international character of the industry, the engineering profession and the influence of multinational companies which recruit in many countries. We therefore have a European model for engineering training which may be compatible with the guidelines of the Bologna declaration on creating a European area of higher education and could therefore accommodate the 3+2 Bachelor's/Master's model. 9

10 Accreditation The Commission is willing to support any initiative (particularly those undertaken by ESEOPE) aimed at setting up a European accreditation system based on a common methodology which defines minimum criteria for the short and long cycles, provided that this methodology respects the diversity and specific features of the engineering profession. This European accreditation should result from cooperation between the national accreditation bodies and, in this context, the Commission calls on those Member States which do not yet have such a body to create one, in accordance with the recommendation on the quality of higher education. (XURSHDQHQJLQHHU As I previously stated, the Commission congratulates the FEANI for having set up the Register of European Engineers and for successfully managing it, given that it currently contains approximately names. I will confine myself to repeating that the Commission has acknowledged before the European Parliament that the FEANI register and the title of European Engineer are a valuable tool for recognising national diplomas between Member States. The FEANI scheme is an excellent example of self-regulation by a profession at European level and constitutes a model for other professional groups in science and technology disciplines such as chemistry and physics. The FEANI register recognises the diversity of training systems for engineers in the Union and can take account of changes which may be made at national level. The Commission considers that an engineer who has obtained the qualification of European Engineer should not, as a rule, have to undergo an adaptation period or an aptitude test as stipulated in Article 4 of Directive 89/48/EEC. The day before yesterday I met with the Board of the new European University Association (EUA) to offer them the Commission s support in implementing the Bologna declaration, and I invited them to use your Register as a model for many other professions. I would like to conclude my presentation by stressing once again the need for all citizens, and particularly those who are working in the field of science and technology, to undertake lifelong learning. Some engineers, who are prisoners of daily routine, are reluctant to take such a path they represent about 10%, which is obviously a very small number. I know that there is a certain amount of reticence among companies to finance such training and that even public authorities are holding back to a certain degree. I would ask you and your Federation to get to grips with this issue and to launch an initiative aimed at promoting continuing training in your profession. I would ask you to talk to my staff about any experience which you consider it would be useful to disseminate at European level, and if necessary to take part in the pilot projects which we are financing under our different programmes. Carry on being pioneers and setting an example for other professions Europe expects it of you. Thank you for your attention. 10