earticle

영어

The purpose of this paper is to study the current status of R&D policies and directions of EU and therefore, link the trend to Korean opportunities. A strong involvement after the Second World War initiated to uphold peace and to bring internal market closer within the Europe. Many significant results including Customs Union in 1968 and Internal Market in 1993 and Economic and Monetary Union(EMU) with introduction of Euro( €) in 1999 benefited the regional economy. As a result, EU, with its roots in Customs Union, developed to an Internal Market giant through five expansions. Today, the community presents a Single European Market with 25 member countries and population of 4.5 Billion. However, despite the efforts to prosper the integration of internal market, the economy competencies between EU and US showed a significant gap. This is when the need of ‘Lisbon Strategy’, in accordance with introduction of Euro(€), aroused in the region. In March 2000, the European leaders agreed to stimulate economic growth and employment and make Europe’s economy the most competitive in the world. If Europe would really reach the goal they set, Europe’s Gross Domestic Product could increase by 12% to 23% and employment by about 11%. According to EU, however, the progress and outputs of ‘Lisbon Strategy’ during the past five years were limited. In Jan 2005, despite its progress in certain areas, EU reported the status of ‘Lisbon Strategy’ with a ‘dark and cloudy’ outlook in the future unless full and active involvements of member countries are provided. During the Brussels Summit held on March 22 to 23 2005, ‘New Lisbon Strategy’ were announced but showed a level of disagreements of few member countries. Among ‘three pillars’ of previous ‘Lisbon Strategy’, economy growth, social unity and sustainable environment, it is discussed that amendment is required to focuson growth and employment at utmost. According to EU Commission analysis, under the assumption of full and proper execution of the plan, EU will expect to experience 3% GDP growth and create 6 million new jobs. New ‘Lisbon Strategy’ plans to increase investment on R&D on ‘Knowledge and Innovation for Growth’ from current 1.9% level to 3.0% by 2010. The result expects to grow 1.7% growth in GDP. R&D policy of EU expanded on three major steps after the Second World War. Until 1975, the first step focused on linear innovation model of balancing natural science and defense industry to cope and manage future economy and military issues. In addition, since the establishment of EU originates from ‘European Coal and Steel Community(ECSC)’ in 1951 and Euratom in 1957, a large portion of R&D activities were focusedin nuclear, mining and steel industry and such tradition is continued up to date. The second step, from 1975 to 1995, EU concentrated on developing industry competencies on high-tech sector to meet its further economic goal and target. Strategic priority on IT and telecommunication industries accelerated on innovation on EU’s newly focused areas. Such change was inevitable due to limited industry competency compared to US and Japan, two oil shocks in 1970s, emergence of Japan despite its lack of concentration in defense industry and IT boom in global economy. EU continued its third phase from late 1990s by linking its R&D policy innovation on social issues. Mainly, the trend emerged from the collapse of socialism. The focus on heavy spending on defense issues ‘transferred’ to globalization of economy and technology, high unemployment rate, new paradigm on environment and life. R&D policy during the period held a measure to socio/economic issues. On the same track, the policy provided socio/economic influences on innovation of daily and social life as well as structure efficiency to enhance further positive factors.= One of the most significant factors of EU’s R&D policy is that it is required the integration of research efforts at European level. Collaborating between laboratories at European level meant ‘sharing’ the false possible output if a certain strategy/policy is conducted on its own by a sole EU member country. In addition, on the bright side, collaborating led to a potential market expansion from ‘national’ to ‘European’ level. Funding issues on pan-Europe level is likely to increase R&D investment compared to when conducted on country basis. Examples include a science and technology research effort as ‘Co-operation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research(COST)’ in 1970s, with the influence of two oil shocks. However, further expansion showed little progress due to frequent disagreement among the member countries and unanimous governance structure. Such trend began to improve in 1980s. Research programs done by individual countries brought a certain level of limits on its capabilities on becoming a global player. What was worse was that research activities in electronic industry, one of EU’s core strategic focus, ‘lost’ its direction byindividual program. As a result, EU members regarded significant awareness and began its initial form of cooperation since 1984, which made progress into ‘Framework Program(FP)’. Along with energy sector, many efforts are conducted in various industries including information, communication, environment, technology, agriculture, food, biotechnology and nutrient with standard. FP, limited to pre-level of fair market competition, is held in every four year period and currently operates its 6th FP started in 2002. Issues and budget regarding on FP matters are proposed by EU Commission, then followed by appropriate procedure from European Council(EC) to European Parliament(EP). It is subject to EU legislation. With its integration of research efforts on hi-tech concentration, EU recognized the strategic benefit of taking the leadership role by co-owning the resources, involvements and even risks. A sure wayto strengthen and accelerate its market presence to US and Japan is to enhance its mutual complementary alliance, conduct large scale research and increase activities with Non-EU countries. On macro level, EU’s transnational research programs are based on a forward thinking approach, where long-term strategic projects consistthe most of cases by reducing duplicable R&D costs, maximizing application and integration of working and other resources and simplifying the procedures of technology transfer in the European level. In the late 80s, many great outputs were delivered such as expansion of technology utilization and commercialization as in EUREKA and Airbus projects. Furthermore, social and technical innovation granted easy access to end-users. Providing solutions to social issues as ‘Quality of Life’ and ‘Sustainable Growth’ enabled citizens to be fully exposed on knowledge and information industries. Many research programs are conducted on cooperative system and strategic alliance among corporate and academic community. As new product cycle and speed shortens and complexity broadens, the importance of cooperative system plays a vital link to success. For example, since 6th FP, EU continues to put great efforts on networking and connecting Europe as ‘European Research Area(ERA)’ with its institutes and researchers. Likewise, many progresses of EU programs forward benchmarking issues to study to Korea. First of all, strategic alliance among Korean corporations in global business environment is a feasible option. Current trend in Europe is that many hi-tech projects are conducted by co-efforts of regions’ corporations and institutes reducing costs and risks and producing synergetic outputs. Secondly, cooperative presence among sovereign-level will provide further opportunities. With Japan and China as well as other Northeast Asian countries, benchmarking EU approach will lead to many opportunities since no single country alone can deliver technical competency in all areas. In addition, intensifying trend in regionalism, information, intellectual property rights and technology transfer leads to expansion of globalization in hi-tech industries. Thirdly, it is appropriate to fully mutually utilize the ‘openness’ of EU on non-member countries. However, Korea’s involvement as of now is far behind on that of US, Japan and even to emerging markets as China and Brazil. Korea is in a right position and critical moment to increaseits participation in global community and develop further relationshipand presence with EU as a partner.

한국어

이 글의 목적은 최근 EU의 과학기술정책 동향을 살펴보고, 이를 통하여 우리나라 과학기술발전에 시사하는 바가 무엇인지를 찾고자함에 있다. EU의 과학기술개발 프로그램은 차세대의 기술경쟁력 제고에 목표를 둔 장기 전략 의 성격이 강한 프로젝트를 중심으로 회원국 기업이나 정부 차원에서 연구개발 활동 의 낭비적 중복을 줄이고, 첨단기술의 응용과 통합흡수에 필요한 인력과 자원의 활 용효과를 제고시키는 동시에, 유럽기업과 지역 국가간의 기술이전이 용이해질 것을 기대하면서 추진하고 있다. EU는 1980년대 중반 이후 EUREKA, AirBus 등의 사업을 통해 기술의 활용도를 제고시키는 한편 기술의 상업화에 노력하여 왔다. 또한 사회와 기술혁신의 결합을 추구함으로써 기술에 대한 사용자(user)의 접근이 용이하도록 노력을 기울이고 있다. ‘삶이 질’ 또는 ‘지속가능한 개발’ 등 당면한 사회문제 해결 등을 통해서 일반 국민 들이 지식․정보기반 산업의 재화 및 서비스 사용이 가능하도록 하고 있다. 이와 같은 EU의 과학기술정책의 변화 가운데 우리가 주목해야할 것은 EU 차원의 공동연구의 추진이라 할 수 있다. 기술의 변화속도가 가속화되고 신제품의 주기단축, 복합화 등이 빠르게 진행됨에따라 회원국간 산학협동에 의한 공동연구의 필요성은 더욱 커져가고 있다. EU의 제6차 프레임워크 프로그램은 회원국 연구자, 연구서 및 연구기관 등이 네트워킹을 통한 과학기술연구를 통합하여 유럽을 하나의 과학기술연 구지대(ERA)로 연결하기 위한 노력을 추진하고 있다. 이와 같은 유럽의 과학기술연구의 흐름은 우리나라에 많은 시사점을 주고 있다. 첫째, 우리나라 기업간의 공동프로젝트 추진을 통해서 글로벌 시장에서 우리 기업들 의 경쟁력을 제고시킬 필요가 있다. 최근 EU의 많은 과학기술프로젝트는 회원국들 의 기업 및 연구소들 간에 공동연구에 의해 추진되면서 연구비용과 위험의 절감과 시너지 효과를 얻고 있음을 눈여결 볼 필요가 있다. 둘째, 국가간 과학기술협력의 확 대가 필요하다. 일본과 중국을 포함한 동북아국가사이에 과학기술분야에서 협력이 비교적 용이한 분야를 찾아내어 EU식의 공동프로그램의 추진을 고려할 필요가 있 다. 어느 한나라가 모든 면의 기술우위를 점할 수 없고, 세계시장이 단일체제로의 진 전, 정보화의 발달, 지적재산권 보호의 강화 및 기술이전 기피 등을 과학기술개발의 국제화가 전세계적으로 더욱 확산되는 경향이 과학기술의 국제협력을 더욱 가속화시 키고 있기 때문이다. 셋째, EU와 과학기술협력을 강화하는 것이 바람직하다. EU는 과학기술협력에 있어서 역외국에게도 문호를 개방하고 있는 추세이나, 우리나라는 범유럽 과학기술프로그램에 참여현황이 미국, 일본은 물론 중국이나 브라질보다도 부진한 상황이다. 따라서 EU의 과학기술 프로그램의 국제적 연계 강화노력에 적극 적으로 참여하여 유럽지역을 우리나라의 또 다른 과학기술의 파트너라는 인식의 전 환이 필요할 것이다.