Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 28
International R&D Cooperation
The U.S. Approach to the
U.S.-EU S&T Agreement
Melinda Kimble
Acting Assistant Secretary for Oceans and
International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
U.S. Department of State
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this special event an an-
nouncement and celebration of the signing of the U.S.-EU S&T agreement and
the kickoff of the implementation phase. As Under Secretary Eizenstat has men-
tioned, the signing of the agreement was a fulfillment of a commitment made by
Presidents Santer and Clinton in 1995 when they signed the New Transatlantic
Agenda. After two and a half years of negotiations and six months of preparation
for the joint consultative group meeting, the United States and the European Union
have a right to celebrate. We also have a responsibility to pursue implementation
expeditiously in order for the United States to realize the agreement's full poten-
tial for this transatlantic partnership. This gathering should add impulse and in-
sight to the task. I commend our hard-working delegates on both sides, the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, and all participants to engage actively as we embark
on this mission of cooperation.
I will speak briefly about our strategy for implementing the agreement and
touch on the State Department' s approach to science and technology, in general,
a topic my bureau, the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs (OES), has been studying seriously for some time.
The State Department, and specifically OES, is the custodian for some three
dozen framework S&T agreements and hundreds of MOUs (memoranda of un-
derstanding), with more arriving each day, that form the basis of bilateral S&T
cooperation worldwide. We take this role very seriously. For example, in the
Western European area this past year alone, we have had important and success-
ful bilateral review meetings or consultations with Finland, Italy, Spain, and Por-
tugal. These activities will continue since there are activities in these arrange-
ments that are more appropriately performed at the member-state level. Sir Leon
28
OCR for page 29
MELINDA KIMBLE
29
Brittan recognized the compatibility of the U.S.-EU S&T agreement with other
bilateral agreements at the December 5, 1997, signing ceremony, underscoring
that the S&T agreement shall not impinge on or prejudice existing bilateral agree-
ments with the United States but rather would complement them.
That said, the U.S.-EU S&T agreement could well become the largest of all
S&T agreements owing to its potential and scope, as well as the billions of dollars
in R&D involved. Moreover, cooperation between the world's best scientists on
cutting-edge research will accrue enormous savings by avoiding duplicative ef-
forts and will yield significant beneficial breakthroughs for the entire world. The
agreement also provides for the protection of intellectual property rights an es-
sential means of encouraging research and technological innovation.
The U.S. government's approach to the S&T agreement can be summed up
in one word: proactive. As the "executive agent" responsible for liaisoning with
the European Commission and the catalyst for energizing over 15 U.S. govern-
ment agencies to support the negotiation and implementation of the agreement,
the State Department, specifically OES, is working hard to make the agreement
operational. To exploit the momentum of the December 1997 signing, our strat-
egy calls for:
· the early convening of the joint consultative group (JCG) called for under
Article 6 to jointly chart next steps in the implementation process;
· the designation of priority areas for cooperation, which include four or
five items under the "sectors for cooperative activities" found under Ar-
ticle 4(a) of the agreement; and
the publication and promotion of the agreement through our public affairs
apparatus, including the posting of the agreement, joint statement, points
of contact, and other information on the OES website: www.state.gov/
www/global/oes.
.
The first meeting of the JCG, to be cochaired by Professor Routti and myself
will be held June 10 at the State Department. It will be an "informal" meeting of
the JCG since the EC must still ratify the agreement. Barring any unforeseen
circumstances, we plan to hold the first official JCG in Brussels on October 21.
The topics chosen for the informal JCG may sound familiar to those familiar
with the agenda for this conference: endocrine disrupters, information science
and technology, materials research, intermodal transportation and intelligent
transportation systems, measurement equivalents, health and environmental ef-
fects of radiation, and climate change prediction. These priority areas reflect our
agencies' interest in cooperative projects (some actually have draft MOUs or
other implementing arrangement documents ready to go); the importance and
timeliness of these topics; and, after close consultation with our EU colleagues, a
mutual acceptance of the appropriateness of joint projects on a priority basis in
these areas. I can also report that we are working to identify several other priority
OCR for page 30
30
INTERNATIONAL R&D COOPERATION
areas for joint cooperation for the October JCG, which will possibly include re-
newable energy resources, biomedicine and health, telematics, and agriculture.
In terms of publicizing and promoting the agreement the third element of
our strategy we and our European partners have tried to make this agreement
and its implementation a public/private enterprise to the extent possible. We real-
ize much of the joint research will be done by government agencies in coopera-
tion with private scientific laboratories, academic institutions, consortia, and small
and medium enterprises. We also understand the interest of the business commu-
nity in the agreement and what it portends for future R&D trends. There exists an
interesting dynamic here, where we look to private industry as leaders in techno-
logical advancement and engines for progress. I would imagine that they, in turn,
are interested in our policy directions and to ensure we complement and rein-
force their plans. This conference, part celebration and part mutual edification,
will help all of us clarify our priorities and learn from our shared experiences
regarding the potentials and pitfalls of cooperation between two very different,
some might say incompatible, systems.
Turning now to a more macro view, I would like to say a few words on the
topic of science at the State Department. I am acutely aware of the criticism
leveled at us over the past year from the perception that the department is
Reemphasizing the S&T function both here and abroad. Quite honestly, there
were legitimate grounds for these concerns, as in some cases mandatory down-
sizing claimed its share of EST positions. The EST cone in the foreign service has
become subsumed once again into the economic cone. This all occurred against a
dramatic 84 percent increase in multilateral environmental negotiations. At a time
when the FUR bureau was adding observers to Bosnia, OES was forced to sacri-
fice the routine for the urgent.
It is axiomatic to say that science undergirds all we are trying to do on the
environmental side. Our climate change, toxic waste, and biosafety talks may get
the attention and headlines, but without the science and technology that come
from it there can be no appreciation for the magnitude of the problems or a plan
for confronting them. With the climate change issue, for example, it was the
consensus of 2,000 scientists from around the world that anthropogenic factors
affected the world's climate; scientific and economic models which will allow us
to map out a cost-effective strategy to meet the challenge; and scientific methods
and technological innovations to monitor and contribute to a global reduction of
. .
green louse gas emissions.
Besides our efforts in launching this impressive agreement with the KU,
which we are commemorating this week, and maintaining the other bilateral S&T
relationships around the world, allow me to mention our recent efforts and plans
to bolster the science function at the State Department. As part of the department's
environmental diplomacy initiative (inaugurated by Secretary Christopher and
endorsed by Secretary Albright) to mainstream EST issues into U.S. foreign
policy, we are establishing a global network of regional EST hubs that will facili
OCR for page 31
MELINDA KIMBLE
31
late interaction between the U.S. government and other governments, nongovern-
mental organizations, and multilateral organizations in a particular region. Our
regional hub in Copenhagen, for example, will serve to galvanize and coordinate
aspects of our Baltic EST policies with host governments, our embassies, and
others in the region.
OES will soon hire a science adviser who will report directly to me. It is
envisioned that with this science adviser, the various bureaus in the department
that deal with scientific matters, including offices in OES, Political-Military Af-
fairs, Economic and Business Affairs, and others, will come together in an S&T
working group or "science team" to coordinate our international programs inter-
nally and then on an interagency basis.
The OES 2000 plan is a blueprint for getting the necessary resources to better
enact the concepts put forward in the Environmental Diplomacy Initiative. Fund-
ing for the regional hubs to hold seminars on emissions trading and joint imple-
mentation, to set up education and training centers, and to assist exchanges of
information and scientific personnel are all part of the OES 2000 plan. The
President's speech on information technology at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology highlighted the importance of computer literacy and glimpsed a vi-
sion of a future where access to information and ideas will transform societies
and enhance our quality of life. We are positioning ourselves to engage other
governments and their scientific communities to initiate or enhance mutually ben-
eficial exchanges.
Under Secretary Thomas Pickering, in his April 30 speech to the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (alluded to earlier by Under Secre-
tary Eizenstat), acknowledged the hard choices ahead regarding the allocation of
resources for science, technology, and environment at the State Department. He
mentioned the review currently being conducted by John Boright of the National
Academy of Sciences (and formerly of OES) concerning the role of science at the
State Department. We look forward to Dr. Boright's report so that we can better
meet the S&T policy challenges of the twenty-first century in order to, as Mr.
Pickering put it, "better advance global economic and humanitarian interests . . .
[resulting] in more science-based cooperation, a cleaner planet, a healthier world
population, regional stability, and global economic growth."
In closing, I would like to thank the Academy for its efforts in putting to-
gether this impressive and important event and congratulate Professor Jorma
Routti and all the European and U.S. participants for a good start on realizing the
potential of productive cooperation under the U.S.-EU S&T agreement.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
international environmental
