Coneixement i societat núm. 11. May - RACO.cat

11CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11Knowledge and Society

SUMMARY

ARTICLES

Ecology, a romantic science? 06

Josep M. Camarasa

Science and technology parks and universities in the technology business incubator system:a contribution based on the triple helix model 32

Josep M. Piqué, Sònia González, Joan Bellavista and Victor Alves

Cirit. 25 Years 48

Fina Villar i López

NOTES

The Barcelona Biomedical Research Park (PRBB) 82

Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert and Teresa Badia

Barcelona Science Park (PCB):research and innovation exchange between universities and the private sector 90

Susana Herráiz, Rosina Malagrida and Fernando Albericio

Creating new technological knowledge: Analysis of a survey of inventors in Catalonia 102

Walter García-Fontes

RESÚMENES EN CASTELLANO / RESUMS EN CATALÀ 117

11

CO

NE

IXE

ME

NT I

SO

CIE

TA

T

Ecology, a romantic science? Science and technology parks and universities in the technology business

incubator system: a contribution based on the triple helix model CIRIT. 25 Years The Barcelona Biomedical

Research Park (PRBB) Barcelona Science Park (PCB): research and innovation exchange between universities

and the private sector Creating new technological knowledge: analysis of a survey of inventors in Catalonia.

CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETATK n o w l e d g e a n d S o c i e t y . J o u r n a l o f U n i v e r s i t i e s ,

R e s e a r c h a n d t h e I n f o r m a t i o n S o c i e t y .

N u m b e r 1 0 . J a n u a r y - A p r i l 2 0 0 6 .

http:// www.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/coneixementisocietat

COBERTA 11 anglès 18/1/07 14:00 Página 1

CONEIXEMENT I.

SOCIETATK n o w l e d g e a n d S o c i e t y . J o u r n a l o f U n i v e r s i t i e s , R e s e a r c h a n d t h e I n f o r m a t i o n S o c i e t y .

N u m b e r 1 1 . M a y - A u g u s t 2 0 0 6

ISSN (english e-version): 1696-8212ISSN (catalan printed version): 1696-7380ISSN (catalan e-version): 1696-8212Legal deposit (english e-version): B-38745-2004Legal deposit (catalan printed version): B-27002-2003Legal deposit (catalan e-version): B-26720-2005

Chief editorJosep M. Camarasa i Castillo

CoordinatorBlanca Ciurana i Llevadot

Editorial boardJoan Bravo i Pijoan, Joan Cadefau i Surroca, Jacqueline Glarner, Xavier Lasauca i Cisa, Esther Pallarolsi Llinàs, Emilià Pola i Robles, Alba Puigdomènech Cantó, Josep Ribas i Seix, Jordi Sort i Miret, IgnasiVendrell i Aragonès, Josep M. Vilalta i Verdú, Fina Villar i López

Coordinating editor and productionGlòria Vergés i Ramon

DesignQuin Team!

LayoutInom,sa

English translationGerardo Denis Brons, Alan Lounds Jones, Carl MacGabhann, Ailish M. J. Maher, Charles Southgate andTobias Willett

The contents of the articles and notes are the sole responsability of the authors. CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETATdoes not necessarily identify with the author Reproduction of articles and notes is allowed, provided that theoriginal author and source are specified.

Subscription to the printed Catalan version of CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT is free. It can be obtained from:Departament d’Educació i UniversitatsGerència de Serveis Comuns de l’àmbit d’Universitats i RecercaGabinet TècnicVia Laietana, 33, 6è08003 Barcelonatel. (00 34) 935 526 700Fax. (00 34) 935 526 701e-mail: [email protected]

Also available on-line in Catalan on the DEiU web site:www.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/coneixementisocietatwww.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/knowledgeandsociety


11



N u m b e r 1 1 . O c t o b e r 2 0 0 6 .

ARTICLES 04 Ecology, a romantic science? Josep M. Camarasa 06 Science and

technology parks and universities in the technology business incubator system: a contribution

based on the triple helix model Josep M. Piqué, Sònia González, Joan Bellavista i Víctor Alves 32

CIRIT. 25 Years Fina Villar i López 48 NOTES 81 The Barcelona Biomedical Research

Park (PRBB) Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert i Teresa Badia 82 Barcelona Science Park (PCB):

research and innovation exchange between universities and the private sector Susana Herráiz,

Rosina Malagrida i Fernando Alberico 90 Creating new technological knowledge: analysis

of a survey of inventors in Catalonia Walter García-Fontes 102 RESÚMENES EN

CASTELLANO / RESUMS EN CATALÀ 117

r t i c l e s06Ecology, a romanticscience?Josep M. Camarasa

32Science and technologyparks and universities in thetechnology businessincubator system: acontribution based on thetriple helix modelJosep M. Piqué, Sònia González,Joan Bellavista i Víctor Alves

48CIRIT. 25 YearsFina Villar i López

ECOLOGY, A ROMANTIC SCIENCE?

Josep M. Camarasa*

Ecology is an unusual scientific discipline with characteristics which it shares with very few others (it is, for ex-ample, a science of synthesis, its multiple roots, holistic focus, etc.). These characteristics and the history of thediscipline show ecology to be a science which is deeply marked by the Romantic thought of the late 18th and early19th centuries and which has reached its high points in periods which coincided with a flourishing of Romanticthought –understood as a critique of contemporary civilisation from within, or a critique of modernity.

Contents

1. Justification

2. ‘Normal’ science and scientific revolutions

3. Ecology, a Romantic science?

A science that differs from others

Romanticism and modernity: an ongoing dialectic

Science and Romanticism: the emergence of ecology

4. Holism and reductionism in the history of ecology

The protohistory of ecology: from Humboldt to Haeckel

Ecology’s view of itself: from the name to the thing

The ecology of the inter-war period: the emergence of key concepts

The ecological revolution of the 1950s and 1960s: matter, energy and information

Not yet a fully? ‘normal’ science: recent developments

5. What now? When is the next revival due?

CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11 ARTICLES

6

* Josep M. Camarasa is an advisor to the Scientific Secretariat of the Institut d'Estudis Catalans.

1. Justification

Ecology as a Romantic science? This affirmationwill, no doubt, be greeted by many with a smile ofcondescension, confirming them in their view thatecology is not a ‘serious’ science. Others, howev-er, for a variety of reasons will choose to disagree.In all likelihood, few ecologists will agree; some willhold that the last thing their field needs is such adismissal. The academic world in general will, atvery least, have reservations, or at worst, will rejectit outright. More than a few readers will no doubtbe surprised to find the name of a scientific discip-line in such close company with an adjective deriv-ing from a social, cultural and artistic movement ofthe past, held, by the majority, to be anti-scientificor, at least, concerned with issues far removedfrom the realm of science. Perhaps, there would bewider acceptance for the view that ecology is a sci-ence with Romantic roots; however, as will be-come clear below, the discipline has myriad and di-verse roots, most of which date further back thanthe Romantic movement, although the Romanticperiod was perhaps the time when all these rootsmet and the discipline began to crystallise.

However, any shock generated by the above affirm-ation is unnecessary to say the least. While truethat in layman’s language the term ‘romantic’ hascome to mean prone to sentiment and novella-like,and nothing could be further removed from a sci-ence –a body of methodically ordered doctrineconstituting a given field of knowledge, yet, anyreasonably well– educated person realises that thisis not what is meant by Romantic literature, musicor painting, or Romantic philosophy. He or she will,to some extent, succeed in relating names such asChateaubriand, Schiller, Lord Byron and Espron-

ceda with Romanticism, not to mention Schubert,Schumann, Gericault and C. D. Friedrich. Howev-er, few would manage to name even one Romanticscientist, despite the fact that the period generallyassociated with the Romantic movement (late 18thcentury and the first half of the 19th century) pro-duced many outstanding scientists. Who, for ex-ample, would succeed in naming Alexander vonHumboldt, Sadi Carnot, Richard Owen or HansChristian Oersted, to name but a handful of themost distinguished scientists of that time, as Ro-mantic scientists? Darwin himself, in his life andwork, was a Romantic, albeit restrained in his lateryears by the staid hypocrisy of Victorian society.

Perhaps we should not find this so unusual. Formost people would also be hard put to name oneclassical, modern, neo-positivist or post-modernscientist. For the majority of our society, the imageof science is that of a phenomenon without a histo-ry or, at most, with a history presented in terms ofindefinite progress, forever moving in the samewell-defined direction, from which but a handful ofheretics stray from time to time. Indeed, the imageof science conveyed by academic and scientific in-stitutions and by scientists as a collective in gener-al is an anti-historic image which divests science ofits past development and ‘cleans’ it of any possibleimpurities associated with its origins, providing animage of a coherent, definitive body of theories,


7

Few people would manage to name even one

Romantic scientist.

knowledge and techniques –solid, free of fissuresand devoid of history. Or if it has history, it is a histo-ry with a set purpose, endeavouring since its in-ception to reach the point it now occupies, a viewwhich ignores the inherent contingency of any phe-nomenon developing over the course of time. Oneneed only look at how any scientific manual pre-sents its subject matter. Subject areas are never re-lated to each other in terms of how discoveries inone area stimulated research which led to furtherdiscoveries in another or the same area. Subjectmatter is invariably ordered by means of more orless logical schema, discarding chronology andthe personality of those who have contributed tothe development of theories or descriptions. Only inhighly public cases (Darwin and evolution; Pasteurand microbes; Einstein and relativity) do we find‘heroes’ in science. Indeed, this often occurs inmistaken contexts; Darwin’s evolution, for exam-ple, is frequently presented in the context of popu-lation genetics which Darwin himself could noteven have dreamt of, or Pasteur is alluded to in adiscussion on prokaryotic cell morphology, a con-cept which was to emerge years after the Frenchchemist’s death.

This holds true both in Physical and Mathematical,and Life and Earth Sciences. Take a book titlesuch as The Vegetation of Andorra or The Faunaof Minorca, in which regardless of the fact thatthe authors warn us, in compliance with aca-

demic norms, that the work is by its nature unfin-ished and always liable to further modification,the title tends to be interpreted in the sense ofTHE vegetation or THE fauna (as if unique andcast in stone) of a given location, now and forever. The work however is merely an abstractionof the given moment in time in which the workwas written and published (dates that rarely co-incide), and of the methods used in studying orgathering data. Such an interpretation overlooksthe following facts:

1. That one thousand years ago (or ten thousandyears ago, or last month, or in one hundredyears’ time) the vegetation or fauna or the loca-tion in question may have been or may be differ-ent, given that all living things have a history.

2. That the interpretation of phenomena or ob-jects could be different if other criteria or meth-ods were used (for example, increased focus oncertain groups of animals rather than others oruse of more qualitative than quantitative meth-ods, or vice-versa).

In other words, if humans have a history, natureand all of its components also have a history, andscience, like all human endeavour, has a future,which makes it contingent; in other words, it isconditioned by what has gone before.

2. ‘Normal’ science and scientificrevolutions

Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that humans,despite the growing evidence to the contrary, arestill all too ready to see themselves as conceptu-ally outside nature and it is therefore difficult forthem to conceive themselves as part of it. Thisapplies to learning about nature, to mastering it,


8

Nature and all of its components also have a

history, and science, like all human endea-

vour, has a future, which makes it contingent.

exploiting or destroying it, protecting it and (in thesupreme example of presumption) saving it.

All this despite the fact that centuries have passedsince Descartes observed, admittedly from a pure-ly mechanicist perspective, that the movement ofthe mechanism of a watch was no less ‘natural’than the flight of migrating swallows.1

However, the advance of knowledge and thetransmission of this knowledge to society is nota simple process; it is neither linear nor accumu-lative, but complex and subject to the generalhistorical circumstances of a given period, not tomention the specific circumstances of the scien-tific community, at both local and global level. Itis now some years since Thomas S. Kuhn(1922-1996), the North American science histor-ian, pointed out that the history of science (i.e.,the history of the production of knowledge) com-prises periods of two main types:

- Periods of what Kuhn refers to as normal science,in which knowledge is built up in line with the gen-erally accepted theories and methodologies of agiven discipline or field of research. These com-mon guidelines, shared by a scientific community,are what Kuhn terms paradigms.

- Scientific revolutions, in which the prevailingparadigms are questioned, leading to theemergence of new paradigms, which are alsothe subject of debate until some of them areconsolidated, and all the knowledge in the rele-vant discipline is reordered in terms of the newparadigms.

The scientific revolution seems to be the price tobe paid in order to avoid the stagnation of re-search (or its becoming merely formalistic andmonotonously repetitive). However, as in the caseof all revolutions, the process is not without casu-alties. Knowledge which, for one reason or an-other, is not incorporated into the new corpusbound to the new paradigms is soon marginalisedand destined to oblivion.2

3. Ecology, a Romantic science?

However, let us ask again: can a science be ter-med Romantic (or Classical, or Post-modern, orBaroque)? More specifically, is there any justificationfor saying that ecology is Romantic? What does thisscience do that makes it different to others?

A science that differs from others

The history of science shows ecology to becharacterised by a number of unique features. Asremarked by Margalef (1974), the history of ecology«differs from that of other sciences for the latter ingeneral tend towards analysis, circumscription anddivision of their field of study, while ecology is a sci-ence which synthesises, combining material fromdifferent disciplines under its own points of view.» Torework a metaphor coined by Margalef –it is not somuch a branch emerging from a common trunkshared with other linked disciplines as a trunk com-prising various different, independent roots. Ecol-ogy is the result of the confluence and synthesis ofknowledge from a range of diverse sciences, andfrom fields which are not even scientific.3


9

1 «[…] And it is entirely true that all the laws of mechanics pertain to physics, in such a way that all things that are artificial, are also natural. […] And, un-doubtedly, when the swallows come in spring, their action is like that of the watches.»2 KUHN, 1962.3 MARGALEF, 1974.

What are these roots, then? Margalef sets out four;four «directions of study» which converged to forma new discipline towards the end of the 19th centu-ry. Firstly, description and classification of the geo-graphical landscape; secondly, the practical fieldsof agriculture, livestock farming, fishing, and so on;third, physiology and etology, and finally, demogra-phy and its associated mathematical perspective.Margalef observed that the catalyst may have beenthe working together of scientists from differentfields in large-scale expeditions and laboratories,such as the first oceanographic or limnological sta-tions. Perhaps, we could now add a further con-tributing field, the recognition of global biogeo-chemical cycles at planetary level which underliesthe emerging field of global ecology, to be de-scribed below.

In addition, partly as a result of the diverse back-grounds of the scholars and the diversity of themedia, organisms and reciprocal relations beingstudied, ecology, both over the course of its con-solidation as an independent discipline and eventoday, has by nature been fragmented into a

plethora of specialised sub-areas and schools, al-though nowadays it is essentially unified in terms ofconcepts (ecosystem, succession, competition,etc.) and theory. All of these factors have hinderedcoherent, clear and orderly historical reconstructionof the routes that led to our present-day knowledgeof the structure and functions of ecosystems, bothat planetary and other levels.

Romanticism and modernity: an ongoing

dialectic

However, to answer the other two questionssatisfactorily a number of issues require clarifica-tion. Firstly, what should we understand by Roman-ticism and, secondly, to what extent has Romanti-cism infiltrated the roots of ecology and caused itto differ from other, more ‘traditional’ or ‘modern’disciplines?

With regard to our understanding of what is meantby Romanticism, perhaps the most pertinent reflec-tion in terms of scientific thought is that of Löwy andSayre in their Revolte et mélancolie. Le romantismea contrecourant de la modernité.4 These authorsadmit at the outset that the term ‘romantic’ seemsto defy all attempts at analysis, given the diversityand apparent contradictions it embodies, nor, theyhold, is any overall analysis of the Romantic phe-nomenon covering its entire range and diversity.

And, it must be added, from the perspective of thehistory of science, when such attempts at compre-hensive analysis have taken place, it has provenextremely difficult to draw generally applicable con-clusions. For example, in the above-mentionedmonograph given over to Romanticism and theSciences, and extending over more than 300


10

The caractheristics of Romanticism which have

a bearing on scientific endavour are: the

hostility towards the mechanicist natural

philosophy and descriptive natural history,

the preference for dynamic and synthetic

approaches as opposed to static or analy-

tical ones, and the defence of the intuitive as

opposed to rational dimension of knowledge.

4 LÖWY & SAYRE, 1992.

pages, both the editors and the contributors shyaway from offering a definition of Romanticism andlimit themselves to a simple description –albeit anaccurate one– of certain of its characteristicswhich have a bearing on scientific endeavour (hos-tility towards the mechanicist natural philosophyand descriptive natural history which characterisedthe Enlightenment, a preference for dynamic andsynthetic approaches as opposed to static or ana-lytical ones, a defence of the intuitive as opposedto rational dimension of knowledge, leading to aheightened value for direct observation of nature).Other equally distinguished scholars, such as Gus-dorf,5 limit Romantic science to the German Natur-philosophie and very little else.

Löwy and Sayre, more daringly, claim that despitethe views of some parties, Romanticism cannot besimply reduced to a literary or artistic movement,nor can it be seen as restricted to certain countries,spheres of culture or historical periods. In theirview, it comprises a view of the world embracingliterature, political thought, music, philosophy, eco-nomic thought, the plastic arts, the history of law,sociology and theology, and which has impregnat-ed certain spheres of industrial society since themid-18th century until the present day, althoughadmittedly more noticeably during given periods,especially the end of the 18th and beginning of the19th centuries and a great part of the first third ofthe 19th century.

In their view, Romanticism comprises a critique ofmodernity, that is, a critique of the modern capital-ist civilisation engendered by the industrial revolu-tion and the spread of the market economy fromthe mid-18th century on. This critique is conductedin the light of values and ideals from the past. The

chronology of Romanticism undoubtedly contin-ues to the present day in the shape of opposition toglobalisation, which, heralded in as the culminationof the development of modern capitalism by its de-fenders, is resisted on the basis of values thatcould be associated with any religious beliefs (defi-nitely premodern in origin) or with a neopaganismbased on respect for the forces of nature (and evenearlier in origin).

The intellectual roots of this Romantic criticism ofmodernity, on the other hand, are not unlinked tothis same modernity. Indeed, Romanticism is bornof modernity, of the anxiety and disappointmentthat accompany some of its outcomes. Undoubt-edly, Romanticism rebels against modernity yet itdoes so on the basis of terms and instrumentswhich it shares with modernity. It is, as it were, aself-critique of modernity. For example, both Ro-mantics and moderns attach a high value to indi-vidualism, linked to full development of the ego, adevelopment rendered possible only by the emer-gence of modernity.

However, the individualism of the Romantics isnot that of modern liberalism. Unlike the latter, itis not a «numerical individualism» in which eachindividual is the agent of a given socioeconomic


11

Romanticism cannot be simply reduced to a

literary or artistic movement, nor can it be

seen as restricted to certain countries, sphe-

res of culture or historical periods.

5 GUSDORF, 1985.

function yet entirely interchangeable in his or herfunction, a situation in which development of aninner world, use of one’s imagination, the expres-sion of subjectivity and affectivity, deviations fromsocially accepted behaviour patterns, are all regard-ed as suspicious, if not repressed outright. The in-dividualism of the Romantics is rather a «qualita-tive individualism», which places the accent on theunique and incomparable nature of each personal-ity, leading to a revolt of the subjectivity and affec-tivity which are repressed, conducted and de-formed by modern society.

In that Romanticism is a critique of modernity«from within», it does not reject modernity out-right, rather it rejects only certain of its traits whichit sees as incompatible with the Romantic world-view. These traits are firstly, the expulsion of allthat is marvellous from nature by the determin-ism of the modern science of Newton and Lavoi-sier, and the reduction of nature by technologyto a mere source of raw materials for industry.And secondly, the mechanisation of the worldand of society, reflected in the destruction of theorganic bonds between humans and nature, andalso in the disappearance of all traditional activi-ties from society, displaced, one after another, bymachinism and also in increasingly ‘mechanical’political systems, headed, metaphorically by the‘machinery of the state’ or ‘party organisations’,which hinder direct participation on the part of theindividual or groups. Thirdly, the rationalist ab-stractionism inherent to capitalist economics,based on such abstractions as ‘jobs’ (without anyspecific reference to any real job), ‘gross domesticproduct’ and ‘currency’. The fourth and final traitis the dissolution of social bonds, that is, thesolitude that reigns at the heart of human society,deprived of human links due to the destruction oftraditional sociability patterns, by the lack of soli-darity, by rejection, by marginalisation.

Science and Romanticism. The emergence of

ecology

Returning to the question of the extent to whichRomanticism impregnated the roots of ecologyand has caused it to differ from other more ‘tradi-tional’ or ‘modern’ disciplines, we must turn againto the opening pages of Margalef’s text for his defi-nition of the discipline and the observations brieflyalluded to above. Margalef holds that ecology isthe biology of ecosystems, ecosystems taken tobe «systems formed by individuals of manyspecies, in a setting with defined characteristics,and in a dynamic, ongoing process of interaction,adjustment and regulation, expressible either asthe interchange of matter and energy or as a se-quence of births and deaths, the result of which is:evolution at the level of species organisation andsuccession at the level of the overall system.»Margalef lays great emphasis on the multiplicity ofstrategies employed to study these systems,even before they were named as such or were evenrecognised as levels of organisation, and remarks,as outlined above, that the history of ecology «dif-fers from that of other sciences for, the latter ingeneral tend towards analysis, circumscriptionand division of their field of study,» whereas, headds, «ecology is a science which synthesises,combining material from different disciplines underits own points of view.»

For Margalef the various fields of study which con-stitute the roots of ecology converged and beganto crystallise as one around the last third of the19th century, when ecology began to identify andname itself. It should perhaps be pointed out thatwhile this convergence process was completedover the years between the 19th and the 20th cen-tury, the process had begun several decades previ-ously and that one of the individual roots played apre-eminently driving role. That root was Hum-


12

boldtian science, that is, the methods for descrip-tion and study of the geographical landscape gen-erally associated with Alexander von Humboldt(1769-1859) though also used by many otherscholars and naturalists of that time.

Humboldt’s life ambition was to «encapsulate in asingle work the entire material universe, all weknow of the phenomena of sky and earth, from thestellar nebulosae to the geography of mosses andgranitic rocks» and all this in «a vigorous style,which would excite and captivate the sensibility.»This work was to be Cosmos, aptly subtitled«Sketch of the Physical Description of the Uni-verse», published in the last years of his life.6 In facthowever, since his youth Humboldt had conceivedall the works he published as stepping stones onthe way to this major culminating work, thereforewielding an influence over numerous scholars in awide range of subject areas. It is in this sense thatone can talk of Humboldtian science –a sciencewhich, setting out from the characteristically Ro-mantic objective of «exploring the unity of nature»,discovering the interaction of its forces and the in-fluences of the geographic setting on plant andanimal life, established an innovative scientificpractice, the main features of which are, amongothers, the explicit aim of studying large groupsand interrelating all the phenomena found therein,including those deriving from human action; sys-tematic use of measures of all types, an attempt torelate them to each other and with observations onplant and animal life, and the introduction of obser-vation networks as a means of study and of iso-lines (beginning with isotherms) as a means ofoverall expression of phenomena which presentgradual and continuous variations in the locationbeing studied.

Probably the first work in which Humboldt gave un-ambiguous expression to his scientific project, awork which should also be seen as seminal amongthe roots of ecology, is his Essay on the Geographyof Plants (Éssai sur la géographie des plantes), inwhich he justified his choice of the geography ofplants, as the primary expression of the physicalsetting and because it also conditioned human lifein both material and spiritual terms. For Humboldt,«the geography of plants, a science which untilnow has only existed in name [...] is an essentialpart of general physics,» which is, in turn, «one ofthe most beautiful fields of human knowledge», theobject of which is study of nature as a whole.7

This holistic approach implicit to ‘Humboldtian sci-ence’ serves to distinguish the work of Humboldtfrom that of earlier botanists who were interested inthe geographical distribution of plants, and is alsoone of the main features of what was to become thescience of ecology. This holism was also, undoubt-edly, clearly Romantic in nature, given that Romanti-cism, in addition to or perhaps even more so thanindividualism, tends to attach a high value to theunity or totality of the ego, both in relation to the en-tire universe (nature) and to humankind (society, thenation). These values are also clearly in opposition


13

6 HUMBOLDT, 1845-1862. In fact the final volume was published posthumously, three years after Humboldt's death.7 HUMBOLDT, 1805.

Humboldtian science, that is, the methods for

description and study of the geographical

landscape generally associated with Alexan-

der von Humboldt (1769-1859) is one of the ro-

ots of Ecology.

to the prevailing values of modernity. The view thatnature was a totality in which the individual mustseek to integrate himself harmoniously is in starkcontradiction with the capitalist principle that natu-ral resources must be exploited to the utmost.

4. Holism and reductionism in thehistory of ecology

Holism was one of the most outstanding traits ofecology in its inception and today it continues tolie at the heart of the tension between the twomain trends in modern ecology: the holistic ap-proach characteristic of ecology in its inceptionand the reductionism demanded by the academicworld if it is to be seen as a ‘normal’ science, a sci-ence like all others. This does not mean that ecol-ogy must reject reductionism outright. Criticism ofthe implicit organicism and idealism of many holis-tic approaches has been well-founded and it istrue that the accumulation of data on species orindividual organisms of an ecosystem on a rela-tively modest scale cannot be avoided. However,reductionist approaches to the problems addressedby ecology will have a greater chance of success ifthey bear in mind how various parts of the ecosys-tem combine on a wider scale. Nor is holism apanacea, especially if limited to the clichéd claimthat the whole is greater than the sum of its parts,yet it must be accepted that the object of study ofecology –ecosystems– have properties which can-

not be explained simply in terms of their parts butrather by how they interact (and, in reality, thisholds true for all sciences concerned with studyin one way or another of living matter, whether atthe level of the individual cell, the organism or theentire biosphere).

The protohistory of ecology: from Humboldt

to Haeckel

The tension between holism and reductionism isnot, in any case, a recent development or a pas-sing fashion. The first flourishing of ecology, as anas yet nameless discipline, stemmed from the workof Humboldt and continued throughout practicallythe whole of the 19th century. It advanced withstudies of botanic geography laying emphasis onvegetation as opposed to flora, on biological lifeforms as opposed to nomenclature; with the con-tributions of travelling naturalists (with Darwin andWallace to the forefront) and scholars of marineand lake waters; with the contribution of geogra-phers and thoughtful lay travellers who reflected onthe transformations undergone by the landscapeover the course of history.

The discipline was not to grow without difficulty,since it had to confront the positivism prevailingamong the scientific community throughout mostof that century and the rigid dogma of the econom-ic and social system. Nevertheless, the first half ofthe 19th century –a high point for the Romanticmovement in art and letters, saw the emergence ofsome of the basic concepts and theories whichwere to form the future basis for ecology. To theseminal contribution of Humboldt’s Éssai sur lagéographie des plantes (published in 1807 thoughdated 1805) must be added, albeit from very differ-ent perspectives, the contributions of Sadi Carnotto the development of thermodynamics (anotherRomantic science closely linked to ecology), those


14

The object of study of ecology –ecosystems–

have properties which cannot be explained

simply in terms of their parts but rather by

how they interact.

of Charles Lyell to the popularisation of «the econo-my of nature» of the Enlightenment naturalists andthe outcome (above and beyond the theory of evo-lution) of Charles Darwin’s Beagle voyage.

In 1824, Sadi Carnot (1796-1832) published hisReflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu, a briefpamphlet outlining a completely new image of theworld on the basis of the practical knowledge ofthe engineers who built and regulated steam en-gines and a very simple idea: in an energeticallyisolated system, temperatures spontaneously tendto uniformity and entropy tends to increase. Carnotdid not yet express it in these terms (the concept ofentropy was to develop at a later stage), yet«Carnot’s principle», according to which «the effi-ciency of a reversible engine depends only uponthe temperatures of the heat source and heat re-ceiver» is in reality the first formulation of the sec-ond principle of thermodynamics.8

The Scottish geologist Charles Lyell (1797-1875)published his Principles of Geology between 1830and 1833.9 In the second volume, published in1832, he reflected on the «economy of nature», thatis, on natural balances and cycles in relation to liv-ing things. Unlike the earlier naturalists (such as Lin-né, for example), who left regulation of these bal-ances and cycles in the hands of the Creator, Lyelldid not attribute the mechanisms ensuring constantproportions between naturally occurring popula-tions to providence. For Lyell, the natural balanceshad material as opposed to providential causes.

Lyell’s book was by Charles Darwin’s bedsidewhen he embarked on the Beagle for his round-the-world voyage between 1831-1836. Darwin

(1809-1882) was to collect the bulk of the datawhich would form the basis of his theory of evolu-tion by natural selection on that voyage. The dateof publication of The Origin of the Species (1859)serves as the symbolical closure to the great Ro-mantic flowering of the first half of the 19th century.

The voyage of the Beagle also brings us to anotherfield which provided the roots for ecology: thestudy of the biology of marine and continental wa-ters. Since the time of the first microscopists, in themid 17th century, the existence of microscopic or-ganisms had been observed in water. However, itwas in this Romantic period that study of these mi-croorganisms began to develop, especially whenJohn Vaughan Thompson (1779-1847) discoveredthat he could catch a highly varied range of micro-scopic organisms in a fine net drawn over the sur-face of the water on the Irish Sea in 1828.10 Thisdiscovery was soon confirmed by Johannes Müller(1801-1858) in the seas around the island of He-ligoland, in the North Sea.

Johannes Müller’s role in establishing the basis forlater development of ecology has not yet been fullyappreciated. Though trained in the values of the Ro-


15

8 CARNOT, 1824.9 LYELL, 1830-1833.10 THOMPSON, 1828-34.

The first half of the 19th century –a high point

for the Romantic movement in art and letters,

saw the emergence of some of the basic con-

cepts and theories which were to form the fu-

ture basis for ecology.

mantic Naturphilosophie, his career took a morepositivist approach in terms of method. Althoughpredating Claude Bernard’s study of «experimentalmedicine», that is, physiology based on observationand experimentation with animals (the first volumeof Müller’s Handbuch der Phisiologie der Menschendates from 1833,11 30 years before Bernard’s Intro-duction à l’étude de la medicine experimentale12),Müller did not by any means reject the specificity ofliving systems and adhered to an organicism whichwas fully rooted within the Romantic tradition, con-templating organisms as a whole:

«Organic bodies are not only distinguishedfrom the inorganic by the particular nature oftheir assembly from simple elements; they alsopresent a permanent activity, manifest in livingmatter, which creates in accordance with therules of final goal. The parts are organised interms of the whole and it is precisely this whichcharacterises an organism.»

Nor did he limit his studies to human physiologybut devoted great efforts to discovering the devel-opment patterns of numerous organisms, includ-ing many marine organisms, and was the first todraw the attention of other scientists to what isnowadays known as plankton, the term given to itmany years later by Victor Hensen (1835-1924).Müller’s followers included, among others, ErnestHaeckel (1834-1919), who first used the term‘ecology’ to refer to the new discipline, and KarlMöbius (1825-1908) who introduced the term bio-cenosis to designate what today is generallyknown as ecosystem, and undertook a full-scalestudy of one such ecosystem: oyster banks on theGerman North Sea coastline.

Yet, in marine biology, the most important ad-vances were not to begin until the creation of thefirst coastal laboratories or stations and the con-sequent proliferation of oceanographic cam-paigns. This began in the 1840s with creation ofthe marine laboratory of Ostende (1843) by Pieter-Josef Van Beneden (1809-1894) and the zoologi-cal station of Konk-Kerme (Concarneau inFrench), in Brittany, by Jean-Victor Coste (1807-1873), but did not become widespread until the1870s, coinciding with the Challenger expedition(1873-1876) and the final acceptance of oceanstudies. The laying of underwater cables and theirrecovery for repairs in the mid-19th century re-vealed the existence of life in the deepest depthsof the sea, which naturalists had previously be-lieved impossible.

Both Van Beneden and Coste were distinguishedembryologists who developed a secondary inter-est in marine biology, mainly due to the advan-tages to their studies of the external fertilisationoccurring in many marine organisms, especiallythe echinoderms, whose radial symmetry held aspecial fascination for zoologists. This growingknowledge of the species inhabiting the seas, howthey lived and developed and their embryos, wasto open many doors for young scientists, includingthose who would bring about the full consolidationof ecology. None of the marine laboratories found-ed in the 19th century was so fundamental to theemergence of ecology as those of Naples andWoods Hole. The former, founded in 1873 by An-ton Dohrn (1840-1909), and the latter, the sameyear by Louis Agassiz, first on the small island ofPenikese, in Massachusetts, and later moving toWoods Hole in 1886.


16

11 MÜLLER, 1833-40.12 BERNARD, 1865.

Ecology’s view of itself: from the name to the

thing

Despite the relative eclipse of Romanticism andHumboldtian science in the mid 19th century withthe rise of positivism and the growing professional-isation of science, the Romantic –or Humboldtian–perspective discreetly held ground, until finding anopportunity to emerge, amidst the prevailing posi-tivism, and sometimes amalgamated with it. Inshort, what happened to the Romantic approach inscience mirrored what was to occur in other fields:successive revivals after long periods of marginali-sation under the various versions of official culture,especially towards the end of the century with theprevalence of modernism and symbolism.

At the height of positivism, in 1866, Ernst Haeckel,the main German follower of Darwin, and not at allvulnerable to the influences of Naturphilosophie or«Romantic mists», introduced the term ‘ecology’ todenominate:

«The science of the set of relations betweenthe organism and the external world surround-ing it, the organic and inorganic conditions ofexistence; what is called the «economy of na-ture», that is, the mutual relationships amongall organisms that live in a given place, theiradaptation to their environment, their transfor-mation through the struggle to live, and espe-cially parasitic relationships, etc. It is precisely,these manifestations of the «economy of na-ture», which the layman, superficially, consid-ers the wise dispositions of a creator who actsin accordance with a plan, that are, with deep-er analysis, seen to be the necessary conse-quences of mechanical causes.»

Haeckel’s role in ecology is limited to having pro-vided it with its name, although even this meritwould be denied him today had it not been thatthose who really did practice the discipline accept-ed the term, for, at practically the same time, othersauthors also put forward terms which did not pros-per. Möbius himself, for example, who in 1877 be-gan study of what he termed the biocenosis in hisDie Auster und die Austernwirtschaft (The Oysterand Oysterculture):13

«A community in which the sum of the speciesand individuals mutually limited by the averageexternal living conditions, is maintained, bymeans of reproduction, occupying continuous-ly a given area.»

Möbius’ study of the oyster banks of Schleswig-Holstein is one of the most characteristic examplesof the holistic approach of Humboldtian scienceand represents a curious updating of it, filteredthrough positivism and Darwinism, and imbuedwith the old Naturphilosophie spirit. Möbius, agreat admirer of Humboldt and a student of Jo-hannes Müller, included all the factors that could bereasonably considered to have a bearing in hisstudy to draw a surprisingly innovative conclusion


17

The growing knowledge of the species inhabi-

ting the seas, how they lived and developed

and their embryos, was to open many doors for

young scientists, including those who would

bring about the full consolidation of ecology.

13 MÖBIUS, 1877.

which is perfectly coherent with the Romantic spir-it: the cause of the apparently irremediable declineof the oyster banks of the northern-most part of theGerman coast was trains. Trains, and of course,the social, economic and political conditions whichaccompanied the building of a single railway net-work throughout Germany, some few years afterproclamation of the German Reich by Bismark andWilhelm I (1871). The improved transport hadtransformed the oyster markets of Northern Ger-man into national as opposed to local markets; thelocal oysters were no longer only sold in Kiel andother nearby cities but rather in Berlin, Frankfurt,Munich and Strasbourg. Demand grew and pricesand profits rose, leading to intensification of oysterfarming. The unavoidable consequence of over-exploitation did not take long to appear and the de-cline in the number of oysters soon set in. This un-derstanding was obviously tantamount to a critiqueof the booming modernity rampant in 1870s Ger-many and its full-hearted acceptance of the mod-ern capitalism that developed with the industrialrevolution. The critique was in the name of valuesand ideals of the past, maintenance, for example,of the traditional ways and means of life: those ofthe oyster farmers of northern Germany, of the bal-ance that had been preserved over thousands ofyears, of a biocenosis, the first to ever have beendescribed as such, which had now suffered theconsequences of irrational human intervention. Yetall this was solidly based on rigorous study and ona then-innovative doctrine, Darwinism.

However, ecology’s recognition of itself as a scien-tific discipline would have to wait a little longer, untilthe end of the century. In the meantime, the first re-sults of the Challenger expedition began to appear,

coastal stations began to proliferate, the first limno-logical studies were published, botanic geographybegan to develop rapidly, demographers perfectedtheir mathematical instruments, thermodynamicswas consolidated as a new method of analysingthe phenomena of heat energy and some chemistsintuitively pointed to what we now refer to as thegreenhouse effect. In 1881, Karl Semper (1832-1893), in his Die natürlichen Existenzbedigungender Tiere (The Natural Living Conditions of Ani-mals),14 outlined a theory of quantification of mate-rial flows from one trophic level to another, andpointed out that the ratio between plant biomassand that of herbivores was approximately 10 to 1as is that of herbivores to carnivores. These pro-portions underlie representation of the biomass ofdifferent trophic levels in the form of the broad-based, narrow-tipped pyramids now known as El-ton’s pyramids, it being the British ecologistCharles Elton (1900-1991) who first drew attentionto them in his Animal Ecology.15

If we were forced to choose a date for ecology’srecognition of itself as a scientific discipline it wouldhave to be around 1895 or 1896, the years of pub-lication of the first work explicitly stating ecology tobe the basis of its content. This was Plantesam-fund. Grundträck af den ökologiske plantegeografiby the Danish botanist Eugenius Warming (1841-1924) published in Danish in 1895 and translatedto German the following year.16 In this work Warm-ing drew a clear distinction between what he calledfloristic geobotany, the aim of which is to establishthe flora of a given territory; division of space intoflora zones and study of the essentially geographi-cal and historical factors which delimit extension ofeach taxon’s territory, and what he termed ecologi-


18

14 SEMPER, 1881.15 ELTON, 1927.16 WARMING, 1895.

cal geobotany (or plant ecology), the objective ofwhich is to study how plants and plant communi-ties adjust their shape and behaviour to environ-mental factors such as available heat, light, foodand water. Ecology’s self-recognition as a disci-pline emerged between the time of publication ofthe Danish original and its German translation and1909 when a revised and much extended Englishversion appeared, entitled Oecology of Plants; AnIntroduction to the Study of Plant-Communities.This led to a measure of respectability as a scientif-ic discipline, although many laboratory biologistscontinued to see it as mere entertainment for natu-ralists and unworthy of the attention of genuinepositivistic scientists, while many field botanistsand zoologists saw it as the frivolity of young col-leagues who refused to subject themselves to thesystematic learning of the field.

In any case, the 19th century was a time of a valuecrisis in all fields and in all countries. Those yearssaw the emergence of new concepts amidst an im-placable critique of the hitherto reigning values inethics, politics, literature, arts and science. In partic-ular, criticism of scientific positivism and mechanismbecame widespread, both from spiritual and idealis-tic and more materialistic perspectives. One out-standing case, which was to wield a great influenceover later development of the concept of biosphere,was the intuitionism of Henri Bergson (1858-1941),who published several of his most outstandingworks, replete with an anti-intellectual vitalism, be-tween 1896 and 1907. Bergson rebelled againstpositivism, yet he also tried to open the method em-ployed by positive sciences to a role for intuition.These were also the years in which the Austrian ge-ologist Eduard Suess (1831-1914) advanced hisconcept of biosphere in the final volume of his mon-

umental Das Antlitz der Erde (The Face of theEarth),17 published in 1908. Suess defined the bio-sphere as the solidarity between all living things andthe factors which made life on the face of the Earthpossible, issues which he had previously studied inthe earlier volumes of his work almost as exhaus-tively as Humboldt had in his Kosmos more than halfa century earlier. Suess did not talk of ecology, yetthere can be no doubt that his concept was to be-come the foundation of global ecology during thelast third of the 20th century. Whether ecologyrecognises it or not, the discipline began to advancein its own right in the years spanning the end of the

19th and the beginning of the 20th century, coincid-ing with the fin de siecle fall of positivism and theresurgence of intuitive rather than rational thought,and the neoRomantic revival of symbolism in theplastic arts and literature of Catalan modernisme,the German Jugendstil, art nouveau in France andBelgium, and the British Liberty movement.

The main protagonists of those early days of ecol-ogy were the heirs to the older geobotanic tradi-tion, of which Warming is but one of the more dis-tinguished exponents. His compatriot, ChristenRaunkiaer (1860-1938), in the same spirit, also


19

At the beginning of the XX century, many lab-

oratory biologists continued to see ecology

as a mere entertainment for naturalists and

unworthy of the attention of genuine positiv-

istic scientists.

17 SUESS, 1883-1908.

defined plant life forms at that time, which, in the viewof the new ecologists were to replace the specificforms which had traditionally been the object ofbotany. The Alsatian Andreas Schimper (1856-1901) went even further in his Pflanzengeographieauf physiologischer Grundlage (Physiological Geo-botany),18 which argued for relatively less impor-tance to be attributed to general climate for plant lifein differentiating a physical drought (due to climate)from a physiological drought (due to the soil) andin establishing plant formations of comparablephysiological conditions according to soil types(hygrophiles, xerophiles and tropophiles), withinthe framework of the formations characteristic ofeach general climate.

The ecology of Warming and Schimper was still astatic ecology, not yet having incorporated a tem-poral dimension. Two American geobotanists,Frederick E. Clements (1874-1945) and Henry C.Cowles (1869-1939), on the basis of observationsby the former on the prairies of Nebraska and by the

latter on the lakeside dunes of Lake Michigan, es-tablished, between 1898 and 1907, the basis for adynamic ecology with their theory of plant commu-nity succession.19 Between 1904 and 1913,Charles C. Adams (1873-1955) and Victor E.Shelford (1877-1968) added the animal compo-nent,20 (which had, until then, been overlooked, withthe exception of some pioneering work such as thatby the above-mentioned Semper), to what fromthat time began to be known as study of the «bioticcommunity» or «biome». Decisive steps were alsotaken in 1913 for the institutionalisation of ecologyas a ‘normal’ science with the foundation of theBritish Ecological Society. This society undertookpublication of the discipline’s first scientific journal,the Journal of Ecology, still in publication today.

The ecology being studied by freshwater scholarswas also far from static at that time. Of particularsignificance, from today’s perspective, was thework of the American, Stephen A. Forbes (1844-1930), The Lake as a Microcosm.21 Forbes seesthe lake

«as an organic system, in an equilibrium be-tween synthesis and decomposition, in whichthe struggle for existence and natural selectionhave led to a balance and a continuum of inter-ests between predator and prey.»

and conceives it as a ‘microcosmos’, that is:

«a little world within itself, –a microcosm withinwhich all the elemental forces are at work and theplay of life goes on in full, but on so small a scaleas to bring it easily within the mental grasp.»


20

Ecology began to advance in its own right in

the years spanning the end of the 19th and the

beginning of the 20th century, coinciding with

the fall of positivism and the resurgence of in-

tuitive rather than rational thought, and the

neoRomantic revival of symbolism in the plas-

tic arts and literature.

18 SCHIMPER, 1898.19 COWLES, 1899; CLEMENTS, 1905.20 ADAMS, 1905; SHELFORD, 1913.21 FORBES, 1887.

Forbes was not alone; those same years also sawproliferation in Europe of small limnological labora-tories. Yet, the main milestone marking the birth ofcontemporary limnology was the work of the SwissFrançois A. Forel (1841-1912) on Lake Geneva,published in three volumes between 1892 and1894, under the title Le Leman, and his Handbuchder Seenkunde. Allgemeine Limnologie (Handbookof Lake Studies. General Limnology), published in1900.22

The ecology of the inter-war period: the

emergence of key concepts

By the outbreak of the First World War, ecologywas an emerging discipline which had begun tobecome institutionalised. It had more in its favourthan the fact that Haeckel had given it a name, yetit was not yet sufficiently confident of its own para-digms. On the one hand, geobotany, from whichecology can be said to have developed, broke upinto multiple schools, often extremely local in na-ture, until the inter-war period saw the Zürich-Montpellier (SIGMA) phytosociological school gaina dominant position in continental Europe, while inthe United States the successionist school ofClements prevailed. On the other hand, the theoryof biotic communities or biocenoses gathered mo-mentum and incorporated statistic populationquantification and mathematical modelling of pop-ulation dynamics from demographics. Limnology,for its part, contributed a model for study of a self-contained system which was to serve as the basisfor the future concept of ecosystem.

Yet, one has to wait until the 1920s and 1930s -again a time of resurgence of Romantic ideas, anda flowering of thought and arts, for the next cre-

ative highpoint of ecology. The ‘roaring’ 20s, withtheir expressionism, surrealism and all the forms ofavant-garde art (together, unfortunately, with therise of fascism –one of the unpleasant sides of theirrational dimension of Romanticism) was a time inwhich key concepts in ecology either emerged orwere reformulated, including the concepts of theecosystem and biosphere.

We owe the modern concept of biosphere, a de-velopment of that of Suess, to the RussianVladimir I. Vernadsky (1863-1945), a man whonever saw himself as an ecologist, yet throughhis contributions was to establish the conceptualand even methodological foundations of what to-day is known as global ecology. Trained in a set-ting which was particularly sympathetic to Hum-boldtian science, –the University of SaintPetersburg, Vernadsky’s teachers included thechemist Dmitri I. Mendeleiev (1834-1907), dis-coverer of the periodic table of the elements, andthe geologist Basili V. Dokutxàiev (1846-1903),founder of soil science. Although, essentially ageologist and mineralogist, Vernadsky developedan early interest in geochemistry and, especially,in the cycles of elements in nature, and realisedthe importance of living matter in many of thesecycles, to the extent that he considered life asone of the main geological forces. His ideas wereshaped during the course of a stay in Paris, from1922 to 1925, in contact with a particularly effer-vescent intellectual setting. His main interlocu-tors at that time were the mathematician andphilosopher Édouard Le Roy (1870-1954) andthe Jesuit palaeontologist Pierre Teilhard deChardin (1881-1955). Édouard Le Roy was astudent of Bergson and had succeeded him inthe chair at the College de France, he also


21

22 FOREL, 1892-94, 1900.

shared the idealistic and vitalistic thought of hismaster and contributed to the development ofthe concepts of biosphere and noosphere in twoof his books, published in 1927 and 1928, inparallel to Vernadsky’s The Biosphere, publishedin Russian in 1926 and in an extended and re-vised French version in 1929.23 Teilhard deChardin, within the framework of the doctrine ofthe Catholic church, had begun to develop anevolutionist line of thought and although he wasa firm believer in scientific method, he main-tained his faith in God and in the spiritual tran-scendence of the human being. Silenced by theecclesiastic hierarchy and by his order, yet ad-mired by those who shared his twofold faith inGod and science, he developed formulations ofthe concepts of biosphere and noosphere whichwere close to those of Vernadsky and Le Roy.

The concept of ecosystem, on the other hand,emerged from the radical rejection by the Englishbotanist Arthur G. Tansley (1871-1955) of the or-ganicist conception of natural communities ad-vanced by Clements and his school in the UnitedStates. A conception in which, these communi-ties, were considered as analogous to organ-isms. Tansley opposed this analogy and pro-posed the concept of ecosystem in 1935, whichintegrated the plant community (Tansley was aterrestrial ecologist who had received a tradition-al geobotanical training) and the complex groupof physical environmental factors into a singlesystem.24

Paradoxically, a concept put forward by a Euro-pean ecologist in opposition to the stance of someof his American colleagues was only to meet withfull acceptance when embraced by a number of

limnologists in the United States between the1930s and 1940s. Also, the importance of Tans-ley’s teacher, the extraordinary European, and againBritish, ecologist: George Evelyn Hutchinson (1903-1991) must not be overlooked. Hutchinson –anEnglishman who never really settled into life inNew England (after retirement and several yearsas an emeritus professor, he returned to his nativeEngland to spend the last years of his life), was theteacher of, among many others Raymond L. Lin-deman (1915-1942), a promising biologist who,before his premature death at the age of 27 yearsfrom hepatitis, had published two articles whichwere decisive for the future of ecology. His Sea-sonal Food-Cycle Dynamics in a Senescent Lakeappeared in 1941, in which, on the basis of earlierwork by Chancey Juday (1871-1944), he de-scribed the role of primary producers in the func-tioning of ecosystems and the relations betweenthe different trophic levels, which he measured interms of calorie equivalents of the average weightcorresponding to the groups making up the bio-cenosis. In 1942, the year of his death, he pub-lished «The Trophic-Dynamic aspect of Ecology»in Ecology (though he did not live to see it in print),in which he generalised his conclusions of the previ-ous year for a senescent lake to any ecosystemand formulated a conception of ecosystem whichhas survived to the present day: a fundamentalecological unit which includes a biotic communityand its environment, in complex interaction, char-acterised by a flow of energy from certain parts toother parts of the same system and a practicallyself-contained food cycle.

No less paradoxically, these articles today recog-nised as milestones in development of the disci-pline, were to pass unnoticed and were largely


22

23 VERNADSKY, 1929.24 TANSLEY, 1935.

rejected by the scientific community to whichthey were addressed. Lindeman’s second articlewas rejected by four referees and was only pub-lished on the initiative of the editor of Ecology(Thomas Park), thanks to the indefatigable insis-tence of Hutchinson, in October 1942, when Lin-deman had died. A parallel, if not identical con-cept, also appeared in 1942 in Soviet Russia: theconcept of biogeocenosis, which Vladimir N.Sukatxev (1880-1967) described as a combina-tion, in a given area of the earth’s surface, of ho-mogenous natural phenomena (atmosphere, sol-id substrate, organisms, waters) among whichthere was a specific type of interaction togetherwith a defined type of exchange of matter andenergy between these and other natural phe-nomena (solar radiation, for example).

The ecological revolution of the 1950s and

1960s: matter, energy and information

The differences between the concepts devel-oped by Sukatxev and Lindeman are largelymatters of words as opposed to truly conceptualissues. Both are in fact developments of the bio-geochemical conceptions of Vernadsky concern-ing the biosphere. This development was moreclearly obvious in the case of Sukatxev, Linde-man’s work having passed through the Hutchin-son filter, Hutchinson being well versed in thethought of Vernadsky –he even translated sever-al of his works to English.25 However, appearingas they did at an unfavourable time (at the heightof World War II) and with Lindeman’s early death,the development went largely unnoticed and itwas not until after the war that these contribu-tions would be recognised as basic elements incontemporary ecological theory.

In contrast, ecology was to develop at a spec-tacular rate throughout the 1950s and 1960s.The first milestone was laid by the Odum broth-ers in 1953, with their Fundamentals of Ecology.Eugene P. Odum (1913-2002), initially an or-nithologist but having studied at Yale withHutchinson, has himself described the lack ofunderstanding among his colleagues at the Uni-versity of Georgia and how the university en-gaged him to write a programme for ecologystudies together with his brother Howard T.Odum (1924-2002), better versed in physics.Fundamentals of Ecology did not include deci-sive theoretical advances, however it was the

first handbook of ecology per se and convertedthe discipline into what Kuhn terms «normal sci-ence», in other words, science with establishedparadigms which are confirmed by studies car-ried out in accordance with equally establishedmethods, until a feature which does not fit intothese paradigms forces a search and discoveryof new paradigms, generally after a period of con-frontation between various schools of thought,ending with rupture and rapid acceptance of new


23

25 A son of Vernadsky was a history professor at Yale and a good friend of Hutchinson.

The ecosistem is the fundamental ecological

unit which includes a biotic community and its

environment, in complex interaction, charac-

terised by a flow of energy from certain parts

to other parts of the same system and a prac-

tically self-contained food cycle.

paradigms which are incompatible with thosewhich preceded them (what Kuhn terms a «sci-entific revolution»).

The contribution of the Odum brothers was un-doubtedly a scientific revolution. In the aftermathof publication of their handbook26 nothing wouldever be the same again. The handbook beginswith a redefinition of the ecosystem along thelines of Lindeman, Sukatxev and Hutchinson:

«any natural entity or unit which includes liv-ing and inert parts, which interact to producea stable system in which the exchange ofmaterials between living and non-living partsfollows a cyclical pattern is an ecologicalsystem or ecosystem. The ecosystem is thelargest functional unit in ecology and in-cludes both organisms (biotic communities)and the abiotic medium, both of which mutu-ally influence each other’s respective proper-ties and are necessary for maintenance of lifeon Earth as we know it. A lake is an exampleof an ecosystem.»

Five main principles are set out in the first pagesof the book:

1. The largest ecosystem is the entire planet, thebiosphere is the part of the planet in whichsmaller ecosystems operate.

2. Ecosystems may be of a wide range of sizes,ranging from the entire biosphere to the small-est of pools.

3. Animals and plants without chlorophyll27 de-pend on green plants, which produce proteins,carbohydrates and fats through photosynthe-sis; plants are controlled by animals, and bothare influenced by bacteria.

4. Organisms also have an influence on the abi-otic medium.

5. Humans have the capacity to alter ecosystemsdrastically.

It is no mean feat to have concentrated in so fewprinciples not only the basis of ecological sci-ence but also that of the ecologist movement,which no one in 1953 could even have imaginedwould ever exist.

There was yet a third strand to be integrated intothe theoretical framework of biogeochemical andenergy flows; for an ecosystem comprises notonly matter and energy, but also organisation.The outstanding contribution in this regard was toarrive in 1957 from a Catalan ecologist who didnot even occupy a chair from which to advance it–Spain not establishing any chair of ecology until1967. The ecologist was Ramon Margalef.

In his entry speech to the Reial Acadèmia deCiències i Arts of Barcelona in 1957,28 Margalefdescribed the trophic relations and energy flowsof ecosystems in terms of «feedback circuits».29 Infact, Margalef had presented his ideas at a scien-tific meeting at the Scripps Institution of Oceanog-raphy in La Jolla (California) the previous year,where he had found agreement from Howard T.


24

26 ODUM & ODUM, 1953.27 At the time of the publication of the Odum brothers' work, fungi had not yet been recognised as constituting a separate kingdom to that of plants andanimals and were considered to be plants without chlorphyll.28 Based on an idea of Henry Quastler (1908-1963), who in 1953 had published a collection of contributions to a symposium on information theory in bio-logy. He suggested that information theory, developed by Shannon and Weaver, provided the basis for measurement in terms of information of an enzy-ne's specificity with respect to its substrate.29 MARGALEF, 1957.

Odum, John Cantlon (a plant ecologist at Michi-gan State University), Louis Kornicker (a colleagueof H. T. Odum at the University of Texas) and oth-ers. Margalef identified the concept of informationwith that of organisation or ‘form’ of systems, withthe measure of the internal ‘order’ or ‘disorder’ ofthese systems and he related it to various of theecosystem’s own processes, such as succession,or with the processes of its living components,such as evolution. In any case, since the 1960s,information or organisation is as fundamental anelement in description of an ecosystem as is mat-ter or energy.30

The developments of the 1940s and 1950s, withtheir outright rejection of the organicism inherentto the approach of Clements and his followers,the search for support in physics and mathemat-ics and the formalisation of ecology as a normalscience meant a distancing to some extent fromthe discipline’s Romantic roots and some couldeven see it as a move towards reductionism. Sobe it; it is by means of such contradictions –thenatural outcome of shared conceptions held atgiven moments in time, that scientific disciplines,not to mention social institutions, the arts andeven fashion, advance and renew themselves. Inthe 1960s, ecology was to move again in the di-rection of its Romantic and holistic roots and, viaquantification of information (or organisation, ordiversity), was to recover on one hand the old or-ganicist metaphor and, on the other, the holisticapproach dating from the days of Humboldt.

Undoubtedly, the 1960s, together with the «roar-ing 20s» would count as the most ‘Romantic’decades of the 20th century. And, inevitably,

they were the decades in which the most spec-tacular advances took place in ecology, from thecontribution of the International Biological Pro-gram (IBP) to the first formulations of the Gaiahypothesis, to the emergence of the ecologymovements aiming to base their doctrine andpolitical action on the findings of ecological sci-ence, a feature distinguishing them from similarprevious social phenomena. This energy contin-ued into the early 70s but yet was to wane in thecontext of the successive petrol crises, as the re-sult of the changing position of political, financialand industrial powers in the developed world.

The first manifestations of what was then knownas the ‘ecological movement’ date back to publi-cation in the United States of Silent Spring in1962, a book which served as a catalyst for arather ill-defined but widespread social unease inthe light of the indifference or arrogance of thepowers that be vis à vis the destruction andmaiming of our natural heritage, not to mention–as demonstrated with all the required rigour byRachel Carson– human health and life.31 At the


25

30 MARGALEF, 1968, 1974, 1980a, 1980b.31 CARSON, 1962.

The ecologist mouvement served as a catalyst

for a rather ill-defined but widespread social

unease in the light of the indifference or

arrogance of the powers that be vis à vis the

destruction and maiming of our natural heri-

tage, not to mention human health and life.

time of its emergence in the United States, the‘ecological movement’ was another manifestationof the hippy movement or the rejection by NorthAmerican youth of the war in Vietnam which,consequently, spread quickly around universitycampuses, especially in California. However, themovement also took less radical forms (thoughnot necessarily less effective in terms of achievingspecific objectives), with the extension of activi-ties to include objectives which had been neg-lected by the numerous consumer organisationsthen active in the United States. These objectivesincluded ensuring the quality of water, air andfood. The Romantic urge to return to and fusewith nature widespread among many hippies,and drawn from the thought of Henry DavidThoreau (1817-1862), merged with the radicalismof the civil rights or anti-Vietnam War movements.

In Europe, the movement was slower to emergeand first began to manifest itself as an extension ofresidents associations struggling to improve condi-tions in poorer areas of the large industrial citiesand fight against the ‘internal colonialism’ prac-ticed in many marginal or less developed areas ofthe state by the government or multinationals.

By the end of the 1960s, the majority of politi-cians, including even some members of the tra-ditional right, in most democratic countries(though not of course in the Spain of the lateFranco years), had incorporated ‘ecological’tinges into their discourse. To the fore, was USpresident Richard Nixon, who gave over most ofhis State of the Union address of 22 January1970 to environmental issues. Practically coin-ciding with this, in February of the same year inStrasbourg, the Council of Europe proclaimedthe European Nature Conservation Year. This ap-parent appropriation on the part of the right ofthe discourse of environmental protection and

the struggle against pollution (pollution beingequivalent to destruction of natural resources,and the result of the accelerated economicgrowth that had triumphed in the aftermath ofWorld War II) led to a certain reluctance on thepart of orthodox Marxist-based left-wing politi-cians in Europe (the socialists and communists)to take up the cause, which they dismissed as‘ecological ideology’. However, there was noshortage of support among the new left emerg-ing as a result of the urban campaigns and stu-dent movements –’66 in Spain, ‘68 in Franceand other European countries, which saw thepotential of ecologism as the basis for radicalcriticism of the capitalist system.

However, care must be taken to distinguish be-tween ecology and ecologism in that confusing,chaotic and equivocal, albeit tremendously cre-ative period, in which both either merged as oneor clashed outright with each other dependingon the perspective taken by the observer, in-evitably subject to a range of scientific and ideo-logical interests.

In terms of science, for ecology the sixties were atime of consolidation of the concept of ecosys-tem and of a search for new unifying concepts,the most outstanding of which being those asso-ciated with information theory. Great efforts werealso made in the terrain of unifying ecology withother theoretical fields of biology (evolution, ge-netics, physiology), Earth sciences (global ecolo-gy, the Gaia hypothesis), and even physics (ther-modynamics) and mathematics. As a result, theIBP had an important ecological component, inparticular regarding the functioning of ecosys-tems, and fostered a more interdisciplinary ap-proach to research in ecology. The titles of theseven sections in which it was organised (Pro-ductivity of Terrestrial Communities, Production


26

Processes in the Terrestrial and Aquatic Media,Conservation of Terrestrial Communities, Produc-tivity of Freshwater Communities, Productivity ofMarine Communities, Human Adaptability andUse and Management of Biological Resources)provide ample evidence of this. The great effortmade in research in the sixties was also reflectedin the expansion of studies of systems theory andits application to living systems, and in particularto ecosystems, a process which was to give riseto a highly sophisticated mathematical ecology. In1968 Ramon Margalef’s Perspectives in Ecologi-cal Theory was published, later to be translatedinto Spanish and other languages.

The 1960s also saw the space race between theUnited States and the Soviet Union, thanks to whichin early 1970, a photograph which was to mark amilestone in human history appeared on the coversof numerous magazines around the world: the firstever photograph taken from space of the entireplanet. All of a sudden, it was clear for all to seehow limited and fragile the material support for alllife and humanity was. The metaphor of the Earthas spaceship and the human race as crew quicklycaught on and soon observation of the Earth fromspace, beyond its military applications (the originalpurpose for which it was developed) became analmost routine tool in studies of natural resourcesand soil uses, and today such images are com-monplace on our television screens thanks to aplethora of satellites.

It was precisely in this context that James E.Lovelock (b. 1919) was to develop his Gaia hy-pothesis. Lovelock, an English chemist and in-ventor who worked for NASA during the sixtiesas a scientific advisor in finding methods to de-

tect any possible extraterrestrial life on Mars.However, Lovelock decided to pose the problemthe other way around by asking how would a hy-pothetical visitor from another planet perceivethe existence of life on Earth’ His conclusion wasthat the presence of life would be deduced fromthe chemical composition of the atmosphere.Only with the presence of life could such a reac-tive gas as oxygen be found in the atmosphere.To postulate that the Earth’s atmosphere was aproduct of the presence of life was but a shortstep, which Lovelock duly took in 1967.32 Rather

than an organic product, he saw the atmosphereas a biological construction, not alive as such initself, but an extension of the living system, de-signed to preserve a given environment from cer-tain aggressions, similarly to a mammal’s fur or abird’s feathers which ensure corporal homeosta-sis. Finally, he presented his conception of theEarth’s living system, encapsulating living crea-tures, the atmosphere, the oceans and terra fir-ma in Princeton (New Jersey), and gave it thename Gaia or Gea, the Greek earth goddess.33

The Gaia concept has gained in biological con-sistency thanks to the contributions of the NorthAmerican biologist Lynn Margulis (b. 1938), the


27

For ecology the sixties were a time of consoli-

dation of the concept of ecosystem and of a

search for new unifying concepts, the most

outstanding of which being those associated

with information theory.

32 LOVELOCK, 1967.33 On the advice of his friend, Nobel literature laureate, William Golding.

creator of the symbiogenic theory of the origin ofthe eukaryotic cells. Recent years have seen de-velopment of global or planetary ecology, the po-litically correct version of the Gaia theory, devoidof the ‘new age’ mysticism with which it seemedto be initially burdened.

Not yet a fully ‘normal’ science: recent

developments

The first oil crisis in 1973 marked a sea change.The late 1970s and especially the entire decadeof the eighties were distinctly non-Romantic innature, with the ‘conservative revolution’ headedby Ronald Reagan in the United States and Mar-garet Thatcher in Britain. The years immediatelyafter also followed suit. Spain, immersed duringthose years in its transition to democracy, wasslow to take positions. However, once completethe transition, Spain swiftly moved from thestruggle for democratic freedom to the pelotazoor «get rich quick» culture.

Ecology, which in the 1960s seemed to be des-tined for a fruitful theoretical synthesis of physicsand biology (between thermodynamics and evo-lution), via information theory, found itself facingthe need to provide solutions for a range of ur-gent, more limited, short-term problems: whatMargalef termed ‘brush and dustpan’ ecology.Therefore, while the presence of ecology in pub-lic debate seemed to grow, the development ofecological theory seemed to have become stuckin a rut over recent decades, with a handful ofexceptions. Post-modern thought may manageto be just about anything it wants, yet it can nev-er claim to be holistic; its essential characteris-tics include relativism and a fragmentation of re-ality. Thus, we see that the ecology of theeighties and much of the nineties, divided as itwas between two opposing trends –on one

hand, a fragmenting postmodernism that led tomultiplication of case studies which, with few ex-ceptions, did not give rise to any general conclu-sion, and on the other hand, the holistic tradition,tended to merely reproduce, with much less in-tellectual vigour, the debates of the 1930s be-tween reductionists and holists.

In fact, this situation is not unique to ecology.Many scientific disciplines today, in searching forautonomy and identity, take the route of hyper-specialisation and endogamy, leading to isola-tion and alienation from all that surrounds themthat is not strictly within their terrain. There ismuch talk about interdisciplinary approaches,yet it is far from frequent to come across workswhich genuinely break down the borders be-tween different disciplines. Specialisation, it isclaimed, is the precondition for high-quality andtruly competitive research and no time should belost in working collaboratively with specialistsfrom other disciplines, who are potential com-petitors in the battle for the resources needed toconsolidate one’s own grouping. Increasingly,there are ‘experts’ who know practically every-thing about one small area, while those knowingsomething about almost everything are becom-ing an endangered species.

Yet when the object of study is the entire bio-sphere (even in the case of a small-scale ecosys-tem), what approach can be taken other than aholistic one, even if different aspects of the sameecosystem must be addressed separately for ex-pressive purposes? How can such a study beundertaken without deference to a history partlydetermined by changes in the distribution of landmasses, seas and ice over the course of time bywhat are usually termed geological factors andpartly determined by the action of humankind inmore recent times? How can one define global


28

warming oblivious to the high consumption offossil fuels over the last 200-300 years, and es-pecially over the last century? What else otherthan consumption of CFCs can explain theweakening of the ozone layer?

5. What now? When is the next re-vival due?

As Margalef wisely pointed out, the inclusion ofhuman beings in the field of study of general ecol-ogy has not only served to cast light on the eco-logical problems of the human species, but alsoto provide a more accurate view of general ecolo-gy. Problems such as those outlined above andothers concerning horizontal transport, flows orsuccession are more clearly visible in systemswhich are relatively untouched by human action.

Yet it is also true that, as has tended to occur inmany cases in recent years, when this inclusionserves exclusively to highlight perturbing effectson ‘ecological balances’ which are seen assomehow sacred, and when ecology or the ‘en-vironmental sciences’ are reduced to mere pub-lic hygiene on a relatively large territorial scale,much of what could be gained is jettisoned andwe are left once again with the reductionism re-quired for dealing with specific cases of danger-ous pollution or potentially harmful processes. Inshort, the perilous confusion of ecology and en-vironmentalism.

This confusion has served over recent years to re-move all studies of organisms and systems fromresearch priorities –precisely the area in whichCatalan science has traditionally excelled and stillexcels despite adversities. Margalef, it must be re-membered, saw himself as a naturalist and assuch– in essence he was an observer and student

of nature above all else– he succeeded in his the-oretical syntheses. This article should not be readas the epitaph of a science which, being Roman-tic, is dispensable. On the contrary, nothing couldbe more indispensable to science than a Roman-tic (self-)critique of modernity (or post-modernity)and reductionism. Rather, it should be read as acry of hope: hope that a Romantic revival akin tothose of the 1920s and 1960s or the years span-ning the turn of the previous century will takeplace, with a consequent renovation of the com-monly accepted ideas regarding science and sci-ence policy which will contribute to revitalising afield which in Catalonia has traditionally provenmost productive and qualitatively important.


29

When ecology or the ‘environmental scien-

ces’ are reduced to mere public hygiene,

much of what could be gained is jettisoned

and we are left once again in the perillous

confusion of ecology and environmentalism.

References

ACOT, P. Histoire de l'écologie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1988.

ADAMS, C. C. «The postglacial dispersal of the North American biota». Biological Bulletin (Woods Hole), 9 (1905), p. 53-71.

BERNARD, Claude. Introduction à l'étude de la médicine experimentale. Paris: Baillière, 1865. [Catalan translation by Jaume Pi-Sunyer: Introduc-ció a l'estudi de la medicina experimental. Barcelona: Edicions Científiques Catalanes, 1984].

CAMARASA, J. M. «Història del coneixement de la vegetació». In Folch, R. (director), Història Natural dels Països Catalans. Barcelona: FundacióEnciclopèdia Catalana, 1984, vol. 7, p. 28-40.

CAMARASA, J. M. «Aspectes històrics dels estudis ecològics als Països Catalans». In Folch, R. (director) Història Natural dels Països Catalans.Barcelona: Enciclopèdia Catalana, 1989, vol. 14, p. 25-40.

CARNOT, Sadi. Reflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu et sur les machines propres a developper cette puissance. Paris: Bachelier,1824.

CARSON, R. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962. [Spanish translation: Primavera silenciosa. Barcelona: Crítica, 2001]

CLEMENTS, F. E. Research methods in ecology. Lincoln (Nebraska, USA): The University Publishing Company, 1905.

CLEMENTS, F. E. Plant succession. Washington: Carnegie Institution, 1916.

CLEMENTS, F. E. Plant indicators. The relation of plant communities to process and practice. Washington: Carnegie Institution, 1920.

COWLES, H. C. The ecological relations of the vegetation on the sand dunes of Lake Michigan. Chicago: The University Press, 1899.

CUNNIGHAM, A. and JARDINE, N. (eds.). Romanticism and the Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

EGERTON, F. N. «The History of Ecology: Achievements and Opportunities». Journal of the History of Biology, XVI (2). Boston: 1983, p. 259-310.

ELTON, C. Animal Ecology. London: Sidgwick & Jackson Ltd, 1927.

FORBES, S. A. «The lake as a microcosm». Bull. of the Peoria Scientific Association, 1887. Peoria, Ill, 1887.

FOREL, F. A. Le Leman. Monographie limnologique. Lausanne: F. Rouge, 1892-1901.

FOREL, F. A. Handbuch der Seenkunde: Allgemeine Limnologie. Stuttgart: Engelhorn, 1901.

GAUZE (or GAUSE), G. F. «Experimental analysis of Vito Volterra's mathematical theory of the struggle for existence». Science, 2036: 1934, p.16 &ff.

GLEASON, H. A. «The individualistic concept of the plant association». Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, LIII, New York: 1926, p. 7-26.

GUSDORF, Georges. Le savoir romantique de la nature. Paris: Payot, 1985.

HAECKEL, E. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Berlin: G. Reimer, 1866.

HUGUET DEL VILLAR, E. Geobotánica. Barcelona: Editorial Labor, 1929.

HUMBOLDT, A. von. Éssai sur la géographie des plantes. Paris: Levrault, Schoell et Compagnie, 1805.

HUMBOLDT, A. von. Kosmos: Entwurf einer physischen Weltbeschreibung. Stuttgart / Tübingen: J.G. Verlag, 1845-1862. 7 vols.

JUDAY, C. «Annual energy budget of an inland lake». Ecology, XXXI, 1940.

KERSHAW, K. A. Quantitative and dynamic plant ecology. London: E. Arnold, 1973.

KUHN, T. S. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962 [Spanish translation: La estructura de las revolu-ciones científicas. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica de España, 1971].

LINDEMAN, R. L. «Seasonal food cycle dynamics in a senescent lake». The American Midland Naturalist, XXVI.1941, p. 637-638.


30


31

LINDEMAN, R. L. «The trophic dynamic aspect of ecology». Ecology, XXIII. 1942, p. 415 & ff.

LOVELOCK, J. Gaia. A new look at life on the Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967.

LÖWY, M. and SAYRE, R. Revolte et mélancolie. Le romantisme a contrecourant de la modernité. Paris: Payot, 1992.

LYELL, Charles. Principles of Geology. London: John Murray, 1830-33. 3 volumes.

MARGALEF, R. Los organismos indicadores en la limnología. Madrid: Ministerio de Agricultura, 1955.

MARGALEF, R. «La teoria de la información en ecología». Mem. R. Acad. Cienc. y Artes Barcelona, XXXII. Barcelona:1957, p. 373-449.

MARGALEF, R. Perspectives in ecological theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.

MARGALEF, R. Ecología. Barcelona: Omega, 1974.

MARGALEF, R. «La teoria de la informació en ecologia a vint anys de distància». Butlletí de la Societat Catalana de Biologia, III IV. Barcelona: 1980a,p.159-186.

MARGALEF, R. La biosfera, entre la termodinámica y el juego. Barcelona: Omega, 1980b.

MARGALEF, R. Limnología. Barcelona: Omega, 1983.

MARGALEF, R. «La limnologia a Catalunya». Mem. R. Acad. Cienc. y Artes Barcelona, XLVI. Barcelona: 1985, p. 203-224.

MÖBIUS, K. A. Die Auster und die Austernwirtschaft. Berlín: Wiegandt, Hemple & Parey, 1883. [English translation: «The Oyster and Oystercul-ture». In US FISH COMMISSION (Washington). Report 1880, p. 683-751.

MÜLLER, J. Handbuch der Physiologie der Menschen. Koblenz: Holscher, 1833-40.

ODUM, E. P. and ODUM, H. T. Fundamentals of ecology. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1953.

QUASTLER, H. Essays on the use of information theory in biology. University of Illinois Press. Urbana, Ill, 1953.

SCHÖDINGER, E. What is life? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1945.

SCHIMPER, A. F. W. Pflanzengeographie auf Phisiologischer Grundlage. Jena: G. Fischer, 1898.

SEMPER, K. Die natürlichen Existenzbeigungen der Tiere. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1881.

SHANNON, C. E. and WEAVER, V. The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press. Urbana, Ill, 1949.

SHELFORD, V. E. «Preliminary note on the distribution of the Tiger Beetles (Cicindela) and its relation to plant succession». Biol. Bull, XIII. 1907, p. 9-14.

SHELFORD, V. E. and CLEMENTS, F. E. Bio ecology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1939.

SUESS, E. Das Antlitz der Erde. Prague and Vienna: F. Tempky, 1883-1908 [Spanish translation: La faz de la Tierra. Madrid: Impr. Ramona Ve-lasco, 1923].

TANSLEY, A. G. «The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms». Ecology, XVI. 1935, p. 284-307.

THOMSON, J. V. Zoological researches, and illustrations; or natural history of nondescript or imperfectly known animals. Cork: King and Ridings,1828-1834 [A facsimile edition was published in London in 1968 by the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History (now the Society for theHistory of Natural History)].

VERNADSKY, V. I. La Biosphere. París: Félix Alcan, 1929.

VOLTERRA V. «Variazioni e fluttuazioni del numero d'individui in specie animali conviventi». Mem. Acad. dei Lincei, ser. VI, vol. II. Roma: 1926.

WARMING, E. Plantesamfund. Grunträk af den Ökologiske plantegeografi. Copenhagen: P.G. Philipsen, 1895.

WARMING, E. Lehrbuch der Oekologischen Pflanzengeographie. Berlin: Gebrüder Borntraeger, 1896.

WARMING, E. Oecology of Plants. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1909.

WIENER, N. Cibernetics. New York: J. Wiley, 1948.

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS AND UNIVERSITIES

IN THE TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS INCUBATOR SYSTEM: A

CONTRIBUTION BASED ON THE TRIPLE HELIX MODEL

Josep M. Piqué*, Sònia González**, Joan Bellavista***, Victor Alves****

The aim of this article is to analyse the role of science and technology parks and universities in technologybusiness incubation within the regional innovation system. The study is based on the business situation inCatalonia in the period 2001-2003, and aims to use the triple helix model to analyse the technology businessincubator system in Catalonia.

Contents

1. Technology business start-up within regional innovation systems

1.1 Innovative environments, regional innovation systems and technology business start-up

1.2 Science and technology parks, universities and technology business start-up systems

1.3 The case of technology business start-up in Catalonia

2. The figures

3. The distribution of roles in the incubation process between universities and science and technology parks

3.1. The origin and motivation of business initiatives

3.2. The technology base for the innovation

3.3. The state of development of the initiatives


32

* Josep M. Piqué is director of La Salle Technology and Business Innovation Park of the Ramon Llull University and chairman of the Network of Scien-ce Parks of Catalonia (XPCAT).** Sònia González is director of Business Innovation and Start-Up at the Research Park of the Autonomous University of Barcelona.*** Joan Bellavista is commercial manager of the Barcelona Science Park and Manager of the Network of Science Parks of Catalonia.**** Victor Alves is head of the international area of La Salle Innovation Park of the Ramon Llull University.

3.4. The profile of the entrepreneurs

3.5. Finance routes and incubating actors

3.6. Location and incubating actors

4. The triple helix model (university-industry-government relations) applied to technology business start-up

5. A model for analysing technology business start-up within a regional innovation system

6. Conclusions

1. Technology business start-upwithin regional innovationsystems

1.1. Innovative environments, regional

innovation systems and technology business

start-up

The sociologist Manuel Castells and the townplanner Peter Hall1 define an innovative environ-ment as a system of social, institutional, organi-sational, economic and regional structures thatcreates the conditions for a continuous genera-tion of synergies, creating an additional valueboth for the units of production, which are partof this innovative environment, and for the envi-ronment as a whole.

The development of an innovative environment ofthis type for technology business start-up is akey instrument for wealth creation in the region.The stock of scientific knowledge is once more

decisive for countries and regions, and themechanisms for transferring this knowledge tothe market are decisive for generating techno-logical and business innovation.

The creation of regional innovation systems forsystemising the relationship between the actorsinvolved in developing business initiatives, andthe establishing of routes to maximise the effi-ciency of the contributions by all these actors,are key elements for setting up a technologybusiness start-up system.

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS INCUBATOR SYSTEM:

A CONTRIBUTION BASED ON THE TRIPLE HELIX MODEL

33

1 CASTELLS and HALL, 1994.

The stock of scientific knowledge is deci-

sive and the mechanisms for transferring

this knowledge to the market are decisive

for generating technological and business

innovation.

According to Castells and Hall, there is a para-dox in the fact that in a world economy with aproductive infrastructure based on flows of infor-mation, cities and regions are increasingly be-coming decisive actors in economic develop-ment: Goodman’s «last entrepreneurs».2

Therefore, regions must organise themselves notonly to attract foreign investment but also to fosterendogenous growth generated by local compa-nies that are able to take advantage of the exter-nalities offered by the region to increase theircompetitiveness. This is particularly the case withregard to new, knowledge-based companies.

The creation of technology-based companieswithin the regional innovation system is one of themost important objectives for reinforcing the qual-itative and quantitative growth of regions. Theroutes systemised for entrepreneurs and innova-tion, the spaces provided and the financing ofnew companies in their incubation processes en-sure that the actors involved can make the bestcontribution to the growth of these companies.

1.2. Science and technology parks, universities

and technology business start-up systems

In the official definition of science and/or technolo-gy parks, the International Association of ScienceParks (IASP) establishes that one of the goals of theparks is to facilitate the creation and growth of inno-vation-based companies through incubation andspin-off processes.3 Piero Fòrmica and Luis Sanz4

identify a key role of science parks in fostering entre-preneurship and innovation. This requires links withthe various actors involved in technology businessstart-up, such as universities and the government,with companies that are consolidated in the market,and with financial institutions.

Philip Cooke5 confirms the good results of system-atically transferring science-based innovation tothe market through marketing and the creation ofnew innovative companies. In relation to the con-cept of «regions» he stresses the important role ofregional institutions (chambers of commerce, in-dustrial associations, public organisations and re-gional ministries) that have the means to lend sup-port to companies and to innovation, particularly inthe case of small and medium-sized companiesand therefore of the new technology-based com-panies. Science and technology parks will play akey role if they understand that they are an interac-tive innovation system in which they must providea mediation and connection structure and act aspoles of innovation for the region. One can find ex-amples of success such as Sophia Antipolis6 that


34

2 GOODMAN, 1979.3 International Board of Directors of the IASP, 6 February 2002. (www.iasp.ws).4 FÒRMICA and SANZ, 2003.5 COOKE, 2001.6 Sophia Antipolis is a science park created by a private non-profit institution with the cooperation of the French Department of the Alpes-Maritimes, theFrench state and some municipalities. It has operated continuously for 30 years and today has over 1,260 companies, has created over 25,911 jobs andis in constant expansion. It comprises many laboratories and research institutes of the University of Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, the CNRS, technical institutes,engineering schools, research institutions and training institutes, and many companies working in the fields of health science, biotechnology, fine che-mistry, geoscience, environment and new energies, information technology, electronics and telecommunications (www.sophia-antipolis.org).

One of the goals of the parks is to facilitate

the creation and growth of innovation based

companies through incubation and spin-off

processes.

are connected to research departments and in-volve an active policy of generating spin-offs.

These policies should promote interaction be-tween the various actors of innovation, such asuniversities, technology-based companies and lar-ge companies, as occurs in Scandinavia andGermany.

As sources of knowledge, universities play a keyrole in the innovation value chain in creating astock of knowledge and transferring it to themarket through the creation of technology-basedcompanies. They also provide training to give en-trepreneurs good management skills.

Henry Etzkowitz7 identifies, in addition to teachingand the research, a third mission: the incorpora-tion of an enterprise initiative and the commitmentof universities to the economic and social devel-opment of their environment. The action of univer-sities is thus divided into three spheres: teaching,research and knowledge transfer. Technologybusiness start-up should be included in the areaof knowledge transfer, in which the innovative fac-tor plays a important role.

The entrepreneurial university needs efficientmediation structures between scientific knowl-edge and the market. One of these structures isthe incubation of technology-based companiescarried out by science and technology parks. Inaddition to managing risk, the entrepreneurialuniversity transforms ideas into innovation, capi-

talises knowledge and creates new companiesand services.

1.3 The case of technology business

start-up in Catalonia

Within the 2001-2004 Innovation Plan, the Gen-eralitat of Catalonia created the Network of Tech-nology Trampolines,8 a network of university incu-bators intended to bolster technology businessstart-up and comprising the incubators of sevenhigher education institutions (ESADE, IESE, LaSalle-Ramon Llull University, the Technical Uni-versity of Catalonia, the University of Barcelona,the Autonomous University of Barcelona and theUniversity of Girona). Five of these seven institu-tions have associated science and technologyparks, in addition to cooperation agreementswith other technology parks such as the VallèsTechnology Park. All the parks mentioned aremembers of the Network of Science and Tech-nology Parks of Catalonia (XPCAT).9

This article analyses the contribution of the vari-ous actors involved in the development of tech-nology-based business initiatives, based on the



35

7 ETZKOWITZ, 2002.8 Technology trampolines are units of support to the creation of knowledge-based or technology-based companies and are organised as a network. Inaddition to detecting new projects and providing advice for their conversion into companies, the trampolines also include a series of initiatives designedto provide business support from the classroom, such as courses on how to set up one's own company within university syllabuses, talks by alumni ontheir experiences in setting up companies, and competitions on business plans. They also offer legal advice, assistance with the creation of the companyplan, support for projects in the seed, launch, take-off and growth stages and advice and support with regard to finding the most suitable financing.www.cidem.com/cidem/cat/comunitats/xtrampolins/index.jsp. 9 www.xpcat.net/.

The action of universities is divided into three

spheres: teaching, research and knowledge

transfer.

study of some eighty business initiatives sup-ported by the Generalitat (government) of Cat-alonia and by the technology trampolines in theperiod 2001-2003. It considers the triple helixmodel,10 showing the role of universities and sci-ence and technology parks, and puts forward amodel of incubation of technology-based com-panies that is applicable to other regions of theworld.

2. The figures

At the time when the study was carried out, theNetwork of Science and Technology Parks in-cluded seven parks set up by universities (LaSalle-Ramon Llull University, the AutonomousUniversity of Barcelona, the University of Bar-celona, the University of Girona, Pompeu FabraUniversity, the Technical University of Catalonia,and the Rovira i Virgili University) and four parksset up by the public authorities (the Vallès Tech-nology Park, the Reus Tecnop@arc, the MataróTecnocampus and the Lleida Agri-Food Scienceand Technology Park).

The universities that had both science parks andincubators were La Salle-Ramon Llull University,the Autonomous University of Barcelona, theUniversity of Barcelona, the University of Gironaand the Technical University of Catalonia.

In early 2001, the Centre for Business Innovationand Development of the Generalitat of Catalonia(CIDEM) signed a framework agreement for col-laboration between various Catalan universitiesto foster technology business start-up by settingup a network of university incubators. The goals

laid down in the agreement were to foster tech-nology business start-up and the enterprise spir-it of professionals located in Catalonia and to at-tract international entrepreneurs to realise theirideas in Catalonia.

On May 13 2003, when the network had beenoperating for two years, a total of 57 projects hadbeen advised and financed. Of the 79 projectsthat applied for financial support, 57 were ap-proved and 22 were rejected, though the lattercontinued to be incubated by the incubator. Fig-ures were available for 71 of the 79 projects (56approved and 15 rejected ones). Of these 71, sixwere at the start-up stage, one had suspendedpayments and three were in stand-by. Detailed in-formation was therefore available on 61 projects.

The information used in this article is the result ofa report commissioned by the CIDEM. It wasgathered between 1/7/2003 and 15/10/2003through 34 electronic surveys, 23 personal inter-views and 14 phone interviews.

A response was obtained for 43% of the electron-ic surveys, and 39% of the personal interviewsand 24% of the phone interviews were complet-ed. In 3% of the cases the interview was not pos-sible and 1% were rejected by the CIDEM.

The figures obtained from the surveys by the CI-DEM were complemented by field work on thegeographic location of the companies, and onthe academic and professional background of theentrepreneurs. The source of the first series offigures was contrasted with information providedby the network of Catalan university incubators.The information on the academic and professional


36

10 ETZKOWITZ, H. and LEYDESDORFF, L. (2000).

backgrounds of the entrepreneurs was obtainedfrom the figures they provided to the CIDEM.

The set of figures obtained formed the basis forthe quantitative and qualitative study of technol-ogy business start-up in Catalonia during theperiod. These figures also provided essential in-formation for identifying the actors involved inthe incubation process and for characterisingthe technology business incubator system inCatalonia.

3. The distribution of roles in theincubation process betweenuniversities and science andtechnology parks

The information obtained can be used for a sep-arate analysis of the different aspects of businessinitiatives: the origin and motivation, the technologybase used, the development of the initiative, theprofile of the entrepreneurs, the financial itineraryand the location.

3. 1. The origin and motivation of business

initiatives

The main types of business initiatives are thosearising from university spin-offs, business spin-offs, academic enterprise programmes and en-terprise competitions.

An analysis of the figures shows that 38% of theprojects presented were university spin-offs. Ofthe 57 projects financed by the CIDEM, 93%were spin-offs. Of the 62% of the projects that

were not university spin-offs, 59% were ap-proved and 41% were rejected.Only one initiativewas a business spin-off. The entrepreneurs hadcreated the company after a multinational closedits research centre in Spain.

The Generalitat created the Entrepreneurs Awardas a catalyst for developing technology-basedbusiness initiatives. In 2002, the companies thatwon the first and the second prize were being in-cubated by the network of trampolines and re-ceived funding from a public body in the form ofconcept capital.11 Three of the four with guaran-teed capitalisation were being incubated by thenetwork of trampolines and had received con-cept capital finance from the Generalitat.

Competitions and awards by local governments,universities and chambers of commerce alsostimulate entrepreneurs and foster an enterpriseculture. These awards have become «land-marks» in the development and public recogni-tion of business initiatives, and act as catalystsfor the exchange of ideas. Incentives of this typemay stimulate the process of creativity, andmake an important contribution to the launchingof a technology-based business.



37

Most technology-based business initiatives

originate in a university research group or

centre among persons doing postgraduate

courses.

11 Concept capital is a participatory loan for technology-based companies of up to two years' duration, which provides funds directly aimed at promotingthe growth of new companies. The CIDEM has developed a line of funding of concept capital to meet the needs of technology-based business in orderto foster the creation of quality university projects by increasing the financial capacity of entrepreneurs.

Most technology-based business initiatives origi-nate in a university research group or centreamong persons doing postgraduate courses.

3.2. The technology base for the innovation

The projects were classified in accordance withthe SIC (Standard Industrial Classification) codes,and the technology base and patents used wereanalysed.

As shown in Table 1, 43 projects of a total of 79were in the sector of SIC code 001, Electronics,Information Technology and Telecommunications(ICT). The projects with SIC codes 006 and007, Biotechnology and Food, were the oneswith the highest percentage of approved projects.The companies with the highest turnover werethose in the ICT sector, whereas the sector inwhich most companies were created wasbiotechnology.

A total of 48% of the companies had bought li-cences and 74% had sold licences. ICT compa-nies understand the purchase of software li-

cences as the purchase of technology. Almost allthe companies in the Biotechnology and Foodsectors sold technology. With respect to themeasures for the protection of intellectual prop-erty, 48% of the initiatives had protected thebrand, 39% had registered a patent and 23%had taken no protective measures.

Though Spanish law provides tax incentives forR&D and technological innovation, 61% of thecompanies studied had not requested any tax in-centives. This is therefore a key area in which incu-bators can be useful as a source of information forcompanies.

It is interesting to note that Barcelona is classi-fied as one of the forty science and technologypoles of the European Union. Marta Riba Vilano-va has pointed out that the correlation in Catalo-nia between scientific productivity and techno-logical activity (in the form of patents) is notreflected as a dynamic integral regional system.12

She states that there is no significant innovationsystem in Catalonia and that the value chainfrom science (scientific productivity) to technology


38

12 RIBA and LEYDESDORFF, 2001.

Table 1Numbers of projects by categories according to the SIC codes*

Total Number Percentatge Number Percentagenumber approved approved rejected rejected

SIC 001 43 27 63% 16 37%

SIC 006 i 007 18 17 94% 1 6%

SIC 002, 003, 004, 008 16 13 81% 3 19%

Unclassified 2 2 100% - -

Total 79 57 72% 22 28%

*1 Electronics, information technology and telecommunications; 2 Industrial production, materials technnologies and transport; 3 Other industrial tech-nologies; 4 Energy; 5 Physical and exact sciences; 6 Biological sciences; 7 Agriculture and marine resources; 8 Agri-food business; 9 Measures andstandards; 10 Protection of persons and the environment; 11 Social and economic affairs

(patents) is not efficient. For technology businessstart-up, patents should be taken into account asa form of protection, particularly in the negotiationof venture capital funding. The figures obtainedshow that new technology-based companies areaware of the importance of protection in some ofits forms, and use it. Measures aimed at protect-ing intellectual property are examples of the firstlevel of transfer of knowledge to the market. Eventhough they represent an evolution of the know-ledge, they have no value until a company buysor licences them.

Before knowledge can be transferred to themarket, there must be a stock of scientificknowledge. Universities and research centresplay a key role in creating this stock.

3. 3. The state of development of the initia-

tives

The development of the initiatives was analysedaccording to the type of organisation, theturnover and the number of workers.

Eighty-eight percent of the respondents initiallycreated a limited company (LC), whereas only10% created a public limited company (PLC).These percentages reflect the legal costs arisingfrom setting up a company: at least €3000 for alimited company, compared with at least€60,000 for a public limited company. Therewas only one case of a cooperative, in which51% of the company was worker-owned, be-cause it was the result of a business spin-off inwhich the workers used their unemploymentbenefit to set up the company. Only one compa-ny changed from an LC to a PLC.

Ninety percent of the respondents intended tocontinue the business project, regardless of its

current situation. Three were considering thepossibility of selling the company in the future.

Of the 61 companies that responded, 14 ex-ported, and 9 of these exported more than 20%of their turnover.

The number of shareholders working in the com-panies in 2001 was 173, but it had fallen to 145in 2002. The number of employees in the firstyear was 88, compared with 244 in the secondyear– a 177% rise. The average number of work-ers per company was 4.4. The number of entre-preneurs involved in the 61 projects was 219,representing an average of 3 to 4 per project.

The jobs created were highly qualified, 75% be-ing for university graduates and 15% for collegegraduates. Both the Catalan and Spanish gov-ernments offer subsidies to incorporate re-searchers in companies, the former through theBeatriu de Pinòs researcher training programmesand those of the Catalan Institute for Researchand Advanced Studies (ICREA), and the latterthrough the Torres Quevedo and Ramón y Cajalprogrammes.

The entrepreneurs state that one of their maingoals is to increase turnover by finding new cus-tomers, to enter new markets and to increasecustomer fidelity. Other goals are to internation-alise their operations and to secure the second



39

In Catalonia, the value chain from science

(scientific productivity) to technology

(patents) is not efficient.

round of financing. In the ICT sector priority isgiven to seeking strategic alliances.

These actions show the degree of commitmentby universities and science and technologyparks to supporting the economic developmentof the region by fostering the fundamental roleof new companies in job creation, economicgrowth and potential for innovation.

3. 4. The profile of the entrepreneurs

The profile of the entrepreneurs –their skills, theirexperience and their professional backgrounds–was analysed.

Whereas 62% of the entrepreneurs had previousexperience in the sector (38% had previously setup their own company), 20% did not. The com-panies of entrepreneurs that had previous expe-rience in the sector had higher turnovers thanthe rest.

Only 28% of the companies had contracted ageneral manager from outside the initial group ofentrepreneurs. None of the projects of the tram-polines linked to business schools (IESE, ESADE,La Salle) had contracted a general manager fromoutside the initial group of entrepreneurs. The sec-

tors that contracted most general managers werebiotechnology and pharmaceuticals.

In Barcelona there are several business schoolsof international prestige. All the universities withassociated science parks offer postgraduatecourses in business management (MBAs).

3.5. Finance routes and incubating actors

The finance routes of the initiatives studied wereanalysed step by step, beginning with the sources offinance, whether public or private: concept capital,business angels, seed capital and venture capital.

In the first two years of operation of this network, up toMay 13 2003, a total of 57 projects received supportin the form of advice and financing. During the periodstudied (2001-2003), the CIDEM assigned €3.8 mil-lion to finance 57 projects, with a maximum invest-ment of €100,000 for each project.

Of the total of 57 projects approved, 14% failed tolead to the creation of a company and one was termi-nated. Seven companies (of the 61 of the ICT,biotechnology and agri-food sectors) had a turnoverof more than €300,000 in 2003. The approved proj-ect with the highest turnover in 2003 (in the biotech-nology sector) grossed €857,972 and had 18 em-ployees. The rejected project with the highestturnover in 2002 (in the ICT sector) grossed€1,400,000 and had 4 employees.

The Spanish Department of Science and Technolo-gy has financed new technooogy-based companiesthrough the Centre for Technological and IndustrialDevelopment (CEDETI), a body that finances innova-tive business projects, and its NEOTEC initiative.13


40

13 www.neotec.cdti.es.

None of the projects of the trampolines linked

to business schools (IESE, ESADE, La Salle) had

contracted a general manager from outside

the initial group of entrepreneurs.

Finance from the NEOTEC fund was requested by21 initiatives, of which 12 were approved, three wererejected and 6 were pending a reply at the time of thesurvey. The NEOTEC makes co-investments of up to€300,000.

There is a systematic relationship between theCatalan and the Spanish governments.

External financing was obtained by 27 projects.None of the rejected projects obtained financethrough venture capital, business angels or pri-vate investors (except by the system of Friends,Family and Fools). The capital market identifiesfinancing with concept capital as an initial steplinked to previous venture capital investments.

In 41% of the cases in which companies re-ceived external financing, it was from industrialcompanies. Partnerships are one of the mecha-nisms of growth of initiatives.

Of the companies that had received conceptcapital, 89% also obtained external financing.Only three of the rejected projects obtainedsome form of venture capital, and always fromindustrial companies through partnerships.



41

Of the companies that had received concept

capital, 89% also obtained external financing.

Figure 1Finance routes of business initiatives in the Catalan system at the time of the study

10,000 –

CIDEM instruments

CIDEM instruments with collaboration agreement

Market instruments

T- 3 T- 2 T- 1 T = 0 T + 1 T + 2 T + 3 T + 4 T + 5 100% public

Accumulated investableamount (in thousands of €) Required returns

1,200 –

900 –

600 –

300 –

160 –

100 –

60 –30 –

– 30%

– 16%– 15%

– 7%– 6%

– 0%

100%private

100%public

Private

Private+

“Informal”public

Seed

Private VC

I + OFFF

Concept capital

Network of Private Investors(Business Angels) (CIDEM mediation)

CDTI - NEOTEC

Co-investment

INVERTEC, SA

Barcelona Empren, R&G, FINAVES,Innova31, Invertec, Catalan Research

Foundation (CIDEM participation)

Seed Launch Take-off Growth

Financing through the venture capital system ispresent in all sectors, but a higher percentage ofcompanies was observed in the area of biotech-nology. Financing through the business angelssystem is used above all in the ICT sector. Onthe other hand, none of the projects related tocompanies in the industrial sector obtained ven-ture capital. Seven projects combined varioustypes of external finance.

Figure 1 shows the finance routes of the busi-ness initiatives identified in the Catalan system atthe time of the study. It has been found in otherstudies14 that neither venture capital funds norscience parks have a significant impact on theindicators of regional technology. Wallstern alsostates that science parks tend to encouragebusiness incubators, but finds no correlation be-tween science parks, job creation and venturecapital.

In the case of Catalonia, it has been confirmedthat all universities that have incorporated tech-nology-based incubators and have a sciencepark show higher productivity in business start-up. The development of networks of businessangels and the culture of corporate venturing bylarge companies complements the existing ven-ture capital system.

3.6. Location and incubating actors

The location of business initiatives and the role ofincubating actors (universities, science and tech-nology parks, local government incubators, etc.)were analysed

Forty-one percent of the business initiatives wereinside science and/or technology parks or withinuniversity environments. Of the initiatives evaluat-ed by the CIDEM only 8% were located in mu-nicipal incubators, whereas 37% used owned orrented property.

In the case of Barcelona. Activa,15 the municipalincubator of the city of Barcelona, there are twospecific facilities for the incubation of companies:the Glories Incubator and the Barcelona NordTechnology Park. A 70% of the companies weresettled up by university graduate entrepreneurs.Barcelona Activa has agreements to access thefacilities of other science parks in the city ofBarcelona. The Vallès Technology Park also hasagreements of this type.

The conclusion has been reached that businessinitiatives are set up in incubators of scienceparks, technology parks and local governments.In each stage of development they receive inthese incubators the physical and technologicalresources necessary for their development.


42

14 WALLSTERN, 2001.15 www.barcelonactiva.es

Number %Location of

initiatives

Owned or rented property 43 27

Municipal incubators 18 17

Science and/or technology parksUniversity environments 16 13

The initiative was not set up 2 2

TOTAL 22 28%

4. The triple helix model (universi-ty-industry-governmentrelations) applied to technologybusiness start-up

Our model of the technology-based incubationsystem in the framework of the regional innova-tion system is based on the triple helix modeland on the results of the above study of theCatalan system. It also incorporates the variousactors that participate in the process: universi-ties, science and technology parks, the financialsystem, the government (local, Catalan, Span-ish and European) and the market.

One of the most important changes that mustbe made in higher education institutions lies inresearch policy.16 Successful knowledge-basedeconomies must be led by science and tech-nology, and a key factor for achieving this is thecontribution to innovation poles by universities.In order to achieve this, universities must be re-defined to allow them to return to their role asplaces of research and not simply educationalinstitutions.

The triple helix is a powerful mechanism that israpidly expanding and becoming articulatedwith other areas. According to its authors,17 theTriple Helix III model is capable of generating aninfrastructure of knowledge in which, as onecan see in Figure 2, institutional spheres are su-perimposed on each other. Each one takes therole of the other, and hybrid organisations suchas science parks and university incubatorsemerge in the interfaces.

The differences between the various configura-tions of university-industry-government rela-tions are currently the object of regulatory de-bate. The Triple Helix I model has often beenconsidered as a failed model of development. Itleft very little margin for the creation of businessinitiatives, so rather than fostering innovation itdiscouraged it. The Triple Helix II model hasbeen associated with a laissez-faire policysomewhat like a shock therapy to reduce therole of the government in the earlier model. Oneway or another, most countries and regions arecurrently trying to achieve a total implementa-tion of the Triple Helix III model.

The common aim is to be aware of the innova-tion of our environment. This consists in univer-sity spin-off companies, tri-lateral initiatives topromote knowledge based on economic devel-opment and on strategic alliances betweencompanies (large, small and medium-sizedcompanies specialised in different areas andwith different levels of technology), researchand technology transfer groups, university incu-bators and science parks. The aim of the insti-tutional innovations is to promote closer rela-tions between universities and industry.



43

16 LARÉDO, 2002.17 ETZKOWITZ and LEYDESDORFF , 2000.

The linear model only expressed in terms of

market pull or technology push is insufficient

to induce knowledge and technology transfer.

The linear model only expressed in terms of mar-ket pull or technology push is insufficient to in-duce knowledge and technology transfer. Publi-cations and patents represent part of the valuechain of knowledge and technology transfer inproducts that can be sold on the market. Stan-dards and regulations should be brought up todate and an interface strategy should be devel-oped to integrate market pull and technologypush within the organisational structure.

5. A model for analysing techno-logy business start-up within a re-gional innovation system

Based on the triple helix (university-industry-gov-ernment), a dynamic system of technology busi-

ness start-up is proposed that brings togetherinformation from the various stages in the devel-opment of a business initiative, including the ori-gin and motivation of the initiative, the skills andexperience of the team of entrepreneurs, thetechnology base and development, the develop-ment and maturing of the company, the locationof the company, and the financial base.

By means of this system, several roles can beassigned in the incubation process.

1. Competitions and awards for business initiativesaimed at developing an enterprise culture andstimulating new business start-up. By universi-ties, government and sponsoring companies.

2. University enterprise and business manage-ment programmes aimed at training and form-ing teams of entrepreneurs. By universities.

3. Statistics on the number of workers andturnover from the official registration of thecompany to the present. By universities, gov-ernment and sponsoring companies.

4. The technology base for the development ofbusiness initiatives with value on the market.Protection of intellectual property. Reports ontechnological feasibility and the state of theproduct. By universities and science parks.

5. The infrastructures and facilities needed to satisfythe changing needs of the technology platforms.By universities and science and technology parks.

6. Investment programmes to satisfy the chang-ing financial needs of the companies. By apublic-private venture capital system co-devel-oped by universities, government and privatefinancial institutions.


Figure 2The triple helix model and university-industry-government relations

Industry

Universities Publicadministration

Tri-lateralnetwork andhybridorganisations

44

As the three main actors (universities, industryand the government) develop their role in thetriple helix, they also create new mixed struc-tures that help to make the value chain of inno-vation more efficient. Science and technologyparks that incorporate incubation models are aclear example of this, as shown in Figure 3.

6. Conclusions

Regional innovation systems maximise the con-tribution of the various actors in the value chainof innovation. The entrepreneurial university isthe first step in a chain that guides companiestowards the main sources of venture capital thatwill help them to finance their activities.

There are several ways of transferring scientificknowledge to the market. Technology businessstart-up incorporates new a model, in whichuniversities, science and technology parks, in-cubators, the government and financial institu-tions contribute to the growth and developmentof business initiatives.

The following subjects have been analysed inthis article:

Universities as a source of technology-basedknowledge.

Science and technology parks: innovation sys-tems acting as mediation structures.

Trained and skilled entrepreneurs with good ac-ademic and professional track records that de-cide to set up their own technology-based com-panies.

The degree of commitment of technology-basedcompanies that, according to market needs, de-velop new concepts, new products, new pro-duction and/or commercial processes or univer-sity knowledge.

The various stages of financing. From the earli-est to the most advanced.

The physical and logistic incubation of businessinitiatives carried out by university incubatorsand science and technology parks.

The role of the government as a promoter andcatalyst of the various actors and a financer ofthe earliest stages through suitable legislativemeasures, the creation of tax incentives and theprotection of intellectual property.



Figure 3A model of analysis of technology business start-upwithin a regional innovation system

PUBLICADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITIES

COMPANIES

MARKETSCAPITAL

MARKETSCUSTOMERS

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS

CONSOLIDATEDCOMPANIES

FINANCING

LOCATIONDEVELOPMENT

TECNOLOGYENTERPRISINGMOTIVATION

CO

MPA

NIE

S

45

Consolidated companies that manage innovationstrategically by developing partnerships, incor-porating new companies (spin-ins) and/or intro-ducing new companies to the market (spin-outs).

Technology business start-up can be consideredas an important factor for wealth creation in soci-ety. Regions that are able to take advantage oftheir internal enterprise spirit have an importantsource of endogenous assets for facing the chal-lenges of economic globalisation from a positionof leadership. A fundamental role is thereforeplayed by entrepreneurs; by universities as facto-ries of technological opportunities; by the gov-ernment through financial instruments and inno-vation management; by business angels andventure capital funds as sources of finance; bylarge companies that wish to incorporate andcreate new companies; and by science and tech-nology parks as means of introduction, develop-ment, consolidation and possible leverage oftechnology-based business initiatives.


46

References

BELLAVISTA, J. et al. Los parques científicos y tecnológicos en el centro del sistema de innovación. Málaga: Apte Ed., 2003.

BOSCH, N. «El modelo catalán de apoyo a las empresas de base tecnológica: los trampolines tecnológicos». Iniciativa emprendedora. 41(2003), pp. 89-101.

CASTELLS, M. and HALL, P. Technopoles of the World: The Making of 21st Century Industrial Complexes. London: Routledge, 1994.

CIDEM (Centre d’Innovació i Desenvolupament Empresarial). Estudi Emprenedors 2003. Informe final. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya,2003.

COOKE, P. «From technopoles to regional innovation systems: the evolution of localised technology development policy». Canadian Journalof Regional Science, 24 (2001), p. 1.

FORMICA, P. and SANZ, L. (eds.) Frontiers of entrepreneurship and innovation: readings in science park policies and practices. Málaga: IASP,2003.

FORMICA, P. Innovating the Agents for Innovation. The Role of the Entrepreneurial Universities. IASP on line Bulletin. July 1998.

ETZKOWITZ, H. and LEYDESDORFF, L. «The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of university-in-dustry-government relations». Research Policy, February 2000, Vol. 29, Nº 2, pp.109-123.

Technology business start-up incorporates

a model, in which universities, science and

technology parks, incubators, the govern-

ment and financial institutions contribute

to the growth and development of business

initiatives.



47

ETZKOWITZ, H. «The Triple Helix: The Entrepreneurial University and the industrialization of Research». In FRÄNGSMYR, T. et al. Science andIndustry in the 20th Century. Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2002.

LARÉDO, P. «Six major challenges for public intervention in higher education, science, technology and innovation». Copenhagen: IV TripleHelix Conference, 2002.

RIBA, M. and L. LEYDESDORFF, «Why Catalonia cannot be considered as a Regional Innovation System». Scientometrics, Vol. 50, Nº 2, 2001.

PARK, S. Y. and L. WOOBAE, «Regional Innovation System Built by Local Agencies: An Alternative Model of Regional Development». Darwin,Austràlia: RAPI National Planning Congress, 1999.

WALLSTEN, S. «The Role of Government in Regional Technology Development: The Effects of Public Venture Capital and Science Parks.»Working Paper, March 2001.


48

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

Fina Villar i López*

The Interdepartmental Research and Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT), now the InterdepartmentalResearch and Technological Innovation Board, was created 25 years ago last November. Despite the obstaclesencountered over this period of our history, particularly in the field of research and innovation, the CIRIT hasshown an infrangible and determined will to lead a project for the future of Catalonia in this field that, if it was nec-essary at the time of its creation, is all the more so today, albeit for different reasons.

This paper gives an account of the key developments in the evolution of the institution and provides some of themost relevant data regarding this evolution.

It consists of five sections. The first, entitled «First steps», tells of how the institution was set up, the social con-text, the personalities involved, the organisational instruments, the goals set, and the first measures that weretaken. The following section, «Key developments», highlights the episodes that had an important influence on theevolution of the institution.

The sections «New impetus» and «Four-year plans» set forth the main features of the activities carried out in twodifferentiated stages, including relevant data and measures.

* Fina Villar is a sectoral monitoring analyst at the Technical Bureau of the Department of Education and Universities.

1. Reflections

I must confess that it has been very gratifying forme to write this paper, as I have experienced alarge part of the history of the CIRIT in person. Iwas rather surprised to discover that no history ofthis institution had been published, and I saw thefact as an opportunity.

However, it is no less true that this paper is in-tended as no more than an outline, and I think theeffort should be made to gather together system-atically and thoroughly all the documentation andinformation that is still available, and above all totake advantage of the opportunity provided by thetestimony of the actors in this part of the storywith reference to coordination, planning and thepromotion of research and innovation.

In this regard, I would like to thank those whoworked at the CIRIT for their invaluable help, withboth the supplying of documentation and their

firsthand accounts (especially Anna Formiguera,Anna Llovet and Sílvia Coba), and also the pres-ent members of the CIRIT team.

2. First steps

The Interdepartmental Research and Technologi-cal Innovation Commission (CIRIT) was created on5 November 19801, by Decree 217/1980, with thesupport of the Institute of Catalan Studies, profes-sional associations and also the main political par-ties. Article 9.7 of the 1979 Statute of Autonomygrants exclusive power over research to the Cata-lan government, without prejudice to the powersthat Article 149.1.15 of the Spanish Constitutiongrants to the Spanish government over the gener-al promotion and coordination of scientific andtechnological research.

The President of the Catalan government chairedthe CIRIT, and its first vice-president, appointed

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

49

Contents

1. Reflections

2. First steps

3. Key developments

4. New impetus

5. Four-year research plans

1 DOGC (Official Journal of the Autonomous Goverment of Catalonia) No. 93, of 12/11/1980.

by Decree 227/1980, was Gabriel Ferraté i Pas-cual2. It also had eight members (in representationof the Departments of Education, Industry andEnergy, Economy and Finance, Regional Policyand Public Works, Health and Social Security,Trade and Tourism, Agriculture and Fisheries, andEmployment), designated by their respective min-isters, the director of the Catalan government'sCentral Institute of Statistics and Documentation,and a secretary.

The ceremony for the constitution of the Interde-partmental Research and Technological InnovationCommission (CIRIT) was held on 11 February1981, with a speech by the President of the Cata-lan government, the Rt. Hon. Jordi Pujol3. Hisspeech highlighted the situation of science andtechnology, and described the functions, lines ofaction and objectives of the CIRIT. He interpretedscience and technology as a part of culture, at thesame time recognising the need to face a profoundtransformation of their economical and socialstructures in order to adapt to a world in crisis.

The point of departure of the recovery of homerule first of all meant retrieving the work done for

science both in the times of the Mancomunitatand during the period of the Catalan governmentin the 1930s, which took the form of, for example,the creation of the Institute of Catalan Studies(IEC). It also meant promoting research in technol-ogy in a situation of scarce raw materials and in-sufficient energy resources.

The inherited situation showed a loss on twocounts. Traditionally central government had lenthardly any attention to the subject of research, afact reflected in the percentage of the GDP invest-ed in research, which at 0.3% stood as one of thelowest in Europe. Furthermore, the situation wasexacerbated by a serious shortage of resourcesand perspectives that lacked definition. The sec-ond issue was that the few resources that wereavailable tended to accumulate in Madrid, a seri-ous problem for an industrialised country like Cat-alonia awaiting entry into the EEC.

In this context, given the deficit that existed, thescheduled devolution of powers did not in itself of-fer a solution. The scarce resources had to be ad-ministered better, and they had to be coordinatedtogether with the Spanish and international scien-tific community. One of the objectives that were setwas to lever investment by central government inresearch up to 1% of the GDP in five years.

The foundation of the CIRIT was thus the first steptowards promoting and establishing a researchstructure in Catalonia, and sought to bring togeth-er and coordinate the research work of several in-stitutions and departments.

The following are just some of the many measuresthat the CIRIT planned to implement:


50

2 DOGC No. 95, of 19/11/1980.3 Published in the periodical Ciència. «La Constitució de la Comissió Interdepartamental de Recerca i Innovació Tecnològica». Special edition 1981, No. 5/6.

The foundation of the CIRIT was the first step

towards promoting and establishing a research

structure in Catalonia, and sought to bring

together and coordinate the research work

of several institutions and departments.

– To bring the entire infrastructure then existingin Catalonia into a position in which it couldwork normally and effectively.

– To push for the scientific community to offerdecent working conditions for researchers, inkeeping with their responsibility, experienceand professionalism.

– To devote special attention to the network ofscientific institutions and that of ancillary ser-vices such as libraries and databanks, docu-mentation centres and test and control labora-tories, and to combat regional imbalance.

The specific lines of action were as follows:

– To work in order to study and implement leg-islative measures ensuring that research in theworld of production and services meets soci-ety's needs.

– To encourage cooperation between public re-search institutions and the industrial and ser-vice sector, cooperative research, and the es-tablishing of potential priority sectors.

– To harmonise the world of science and tech-nology and pursue a policy of decentralisationin all spheres.

According to the decree whereby it was set up,the goal of the CIRIT was to coordinate all the af-fected sectors in order to programme scientificpriorities, set evaluation criteria and foster re-search, with a view to achieving beneficial resultsin devising an appropriate science policy in Cat-alonia, supporting scientific research in all its as-pects, and encouraging technological research.

In order to be able to fulfil its objectives, the Com-mission was to be advised by the scientific commu-

nity and research institutions, which was made pos-sible through the Science and Technology Board, asprovided for by Decree 217. Joan Oró i Florensachaired this board initially, in accordance with De-cree 225/19804. The duties of the Board were:

– To advise the Catalan government and providewhatever recommendations or reports on sci-ence policy and research were requested of itby the departments of the Catalan government.

– To study Catalonia's scientific and technologi-cal goals and research priorities, according tothe country's needs.

– To assess scientific and technological activityand propose evaluation and selection criteriafor general research programmes.

– To raise to the Interdepartmental Researchand Technological Innovation Commission aproject for the rational distribution of resourcesdedicated to research in Catalonia.

– To serve as an informative body in relationsbetween the Spanish and Catalan govern-ments on matters of scientific and technologi-cal research.

– To inform on cooperation agreements betweenthe Catalan government and the universities,research centres and other public and privateinstitutions.

– To study the relationship between researchand the economy, in order to establish themost appropriate scientific methods leading togreater efficiency and economic promotion offundamental and applied research.

The executive body of the Board was the Techni-cal Bureau for Research, which also acted as theSecretariat of the CIRIT. It was organisationallyattached to the Department of Education.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

51

4 Decree 225/1980, of 6 November 1980, (DOGC No. 94, of 14/11/1980).

In turn, the Directorate-General of University Ed-ucation (DGEU) was created in accordance withDecree 232/19805 on the organisational struc-ture of the Department of Education. Accordingto Article 5 of this decree, the duties of the Di-rectorate-General were:

– To plan and coordinate university teaching andresearch.

– To devise policies and action plans for teachertraining and retraining at all levels of education.

– To inspect and evaluate the whole of the uni-versity system of Catalonia.

– All those duties derived from the exercise ofthe powers conferred on the Catalan govern-ment by Article 15 of the Statute of Autonomy,corresponding to the level of university educa-tion, as powers were devolved from the Span-ish to the Catalan government.

Subsequently, in accordance with Decree282/19806 on the development of the organisation-al structure of the Department of Education, theUniversities Service and the Teacher Training andRetraining Service were set up within the DGEU,and at the same time the Technical Bureau for Re-search came under the DGEU as a third service.

The Technical Bureau for Research was empow-ered to establish and implement the researchpromotion policies of the Department of Educa-tion, primarily in connection with research doneat Catalan universities, and in this respect itplayed a leading role, together with the CIRIT.

The CIRIT Secretariat was created in 1981, byDecree 476/19817, with the level of service. It

was organisationally and functionally attached tothe Department of the Presidency, and assumedthe duties until then performed by the TechnicalBureau for Research. Narcís Majó i Clavell wasappointed as its first secretary8. The necessaryeconomic resources for its functioning were pro-vided by the Department of the Presidency.

The first measures taken by the CIRIT respondedto its foundational goals, and thus supported re-search through the awarding of grants, althoughthe method used in most cases did not involvepublic announcements.

Some of these measures were taken on the initia-tive of the CIRIT, while in others the CIRIT acted incollaboration with other bodies. As the Presidentof the Catalan government had stated in his inau-gural speech, some of its most significant meas-ures were aimed at ensuring that the existing in-frastructure allowed work to be carried outnormally and efficiently. Furthermore, it was impor-tant to push for the scientific community to havedecent working conditions, and to devote specialattention to ancillary services such as libraries.

Among the measures aimed at fostering humanresources, the following stand out for their contin-ued relevance, as they are still in operation today,and for the promotional role they have played.

Prizes for encouraging the scientific spirit in youngpeople. These were first called in the 1981-1982academic year, with the intention of encouragingyoung people, together with their teachers, toperform study and research. The aim was to bringyoung people closer to the world of science, not


52

5 Decree 232/1980 of 18 November 1980 (DOGC No. 96, of 26/11/1980).6 Decree 282/1980 of 1 December 1980 (DOGC No. 101, of 17/12/1980).7 Decree 476/1981 of 14 December 1981 (DOGC No. 193, of 22/01/1982).8 Order of 15 March 1982 (DOGC No. 215, of 16/04/1982).

as mere spectators but as protagonists of a sci-entific experience. As a result of the success ofthat first edition, the CIRIT Prizes have continuedto be called every year, in 2006 reaching the 25thedition. The value of the prizes has risen graduallyover the years; they were and still are modest, al-though this has done nothing to undermine theirpopularity. Thus, the prizes for the best projectsand the best schools, which stood at 25,000 and30,000 pesetas respectively in 1982, now standat €500 and €2,000.

The requisites demanded of the projects that arepresented for the prizes have also remained con-stant throughout this period, as regards both purelyformal matters (such as length) and content, as hasthe requisite of the use of the Catalan language, animportant point at such an early stage as 1982.

About 100 projects and schools have beenawarded prizes each year. Since the first editionmore than 7,000 projects have been presented, ofwhich more than 2,000, from over 250 schools,have received a prize.

Over the years, the prizes have had the highest in-stitutional recognition, through the participation ofthe highest authorities at the prize-giving ceremo-ny. This has undoubtedly given it an added ap-peal, and has helped to reinforce the objective ofthe prizes: to nurture the scientific spirit in youngpeople.

Study abroad scholarships. These were createdwith the aim of promoting a researcher trainingplan designed to cover all areas of knowledge, in-crease the depth of that knowledge and optimiseavailable resources while awaiting the correspond-ing devolution of services. The scholarships werefirst offered in 1981, and have continued to beawarded until the present.

Several different types of scholarships have beengiven in the intervening years, including scholar-ships for «third-cycle» or postgraduate researchactivities, postdoctoral scholarships, and scholar-ships for teaching and research staff. The length ofthe scholarship has also varied; as well as long-term scholarships, short-term ones have occa-sionally been awarded. The format of the an-nouncements has sometimes been that of a singlepublic announcement with different types of schol-arships, while on other occasions there have beena number of different announcements within thesame edition. More than 2,000 researchers havebenefited from this programme which has entailedtotal spending in excess of €12 million to date.

In the area of support for research infrastructures,in 1981 service improvement grants were offeredfor institutions with incomplete equipment or facil-ities due to lack of resources or insufficient infra-structure or management (DOGC No. 170, of 28October 1981), with the aim of enabling them tofunction normally and effectively.

In the field of devoting special attention to ancillaryservices such as libraries, a competition wascalled to establish collaboration agreements withscience libraries to complete bibliographical col-lections. The purpose of this competition was tohelp to narrow the gap in the necessary bibliogra-

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

53

In the 1981-1982 academic year the Prizes for

encouraging the scientific spirit in young

people were first called. These prizes have

continued to be called every year, in 2006

reaching the 25th edition.

phy and scientific and technological documenta-tion, and to make up for shortfalls in mechanisa-tion, depending on the provisions of the agree-ments reached.

Among other measures taken on the CIRIT's owninitiative, its research grants were paramount. Inorder to encourage scientific research, it was nec-essary to act on areas of interest for the develop-ment in Catalonia of science and technology inthe primary, secondary and tertiary sectors. In thisway, grants were awarded for research projectsby university graduates or collaborators linked toCatalonia and engaged in a specific task of inter-est for the scientific and technological develop-ment of Catalonia.

Grants were also given for scientific meetings andcongresses. Subsequently, in 1984,9 a procedurewas established for applying for these grants bymeans of a public announcement.

The CIRIT had the possibility of acting through pri-ority research lines. Specifically, the following lineswere defined: genetic engineering and biotechnol-ogy, microelectronics, and the integrated study ofecosystems.

Simultaneously the CIRIT started up a line of col-laboration with other institutions in order to pro-mote their initiatives. The following are some ofthe most important:

– Specialist courses organised by the Institute ofCatalan Studies and given by scientists livingabroad.

– Support for the journal Ciència. This journalwas first issued in the period 1926-1933. The

new publication set out to be an informationplatform and the first vehicle for the populari-sation of science in the Catalan language. Itwas intended as a serious yet attractive andreadable periodical, and as a mouthpiece for in-ternational scientific advances. A tribune forinformation and debate on the scientific andtechnological problems facing our nationalcommunity and an effective tool in the processof the normalisation of Catalan as a languagefor scientific expression and teaching at theservice of the cultural reawakening of thecountry.

– White paper on research in Catalonia. An initia-tive of the Institute of Catalan Studies, withwhich the CIRIT signed an agreement. The ob-jective was to gain an in-depth picture of thehuman and material resources existing in Cat-alonia in the field of R&D, by taking a census ofresearchers.

3. Key developments

In the course of these first years of life, the CIRITworked to ensure that the infrastructure then ex-isting in Catalonia was in a position to functionnormally and effectively, to improve the opportuni-ties of the scientific community in keeping withtheir responsibility and experience, and to devotespecial attention to the network of scientific insti-tutions and ancillary services.

As a consequence of the awarding of the variousgrants and scholarships, this work had caused aconsiderable increase in the budget. By 1982 theCIRIT had multiplied its 1980 budget fivefold, from50 to 250 million pesetas.


54

9 DOGC No. 423, of 6/04/1984.

Following the lines of action initially laid down,and with the intention of setting forth a generalframework, Republican Left of Catalonia (ERC)promoted a private bill in 1983 which was pre-sented by all the parliamentary groups and fol-lowed up by the Bureau of the Parliament.

The aim of the law was to establish the conditionsenabling efficient, quality scientific and technologi-cal research to take root in Catalonia, taking thisresearch as a creative process and an instrumentat the service of the progress of society. The lawalso sought to provide research policy with thehuman and financial means to achieve an in-crease in knowledge and to evaluate and applythe results obtained; an increase in industrial,health, agricultural and service potential; and thedissemination of scientific and technological infor-mation. Lastly, it also aspired to encourage thespirit of research and technological innovation inall citizens, and to enable them to participate,each according to his or her ability, in the develop-ment and dissemination of scientific and techno-logical culture.

According to the provisions of the 1983 researchand technological innovation bill, the CIRIT was tobe the government body responsible for draftingand planning scientific and technological innova-tion policy and its budget, coordinating the re-search measures taken by the various depart-ments of the Catalan government, and performingthe primary coordination of all scientific activitycarried out in Catalonia.

However, this initiative was cut short by the sub-sequent passing by the Spanish parliament ofLaw 13/1986, of 14 April 1986, on the Promotion

and General Coordination of Scientific and Tech-nological Research.

The Catalan government appealed against thislaw on the grounds of unconstitutionality, allegingthat it did not provide for neither the correct distri-bution of powers nor the coordination of their ex-ercise, and furthermore that, with regard to thosebodies created under preconstitutional legislation,it did not establish their adaptation to the struc-ture of the State of autonomous communities.The appeal was dismissed in 1992.

In this context, the Institute for Food and Agricul-tural Research and Technology (IRTA) was createdin 1985, by Law 23/1985.10 The Institute took theform of a public body and its objectives were topromote technological research and innovation inthe agri-food sphere, and to facilitate both therapid and effective transfer of its technological ad-vances and also the coordination and collabora-tion of the public and private sectors in these ar-eas, including the mobilisation and stimulation ofpublic and private investment and the furtheranceof technological improvement. Its work complied

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

55

The initiative for promoting a catalan re-

search and innovation bill in 1983 was cut

short by the subsequent passing by the Spa-

nish parliament of Law 13/1986, of 14 April 1986,

on the Promotion and General Coordination

of Scientific and Technological Research.

10 Law 23/1985 of 28 November 1985 (DOGC No. 621, of 4/12/1985).

with the principle of non-discrimination against theprivate sector by the public sector.

Nevertheless, the devolution of powers ceased af-ter the completion of those necessary for the cre-ation of the IRTA, and thus the research centres ofthe Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC)were not devolved.

Specifically, in the university sphere, Organic Law11/1983 on University Reform (LRU)11 stated in itssecond final provision that those autonomouscommunities that acceded to autonomy via Article143 of the Spanish Constitution would assumethe powers provided by this law in the periodsfixed by their statutes of autonomy.

The passing of the LRU paved the way for thedevolution of the universities, by means of RoyalDecree 305/1985,12 of 6 February 1985 and witheffect as of 1 February. Decree 83/1985 allocat-ed the devolved services to the Department ofEducation.

However, the universities were only fully devolvedwith regard to their teaching activity, as the immi-nent Science Law was to establish that Spain's

universities as a whole were the bodies responsi-ble for executing research, subject to the promo-tion and coordination of the central government.

The science policies of the Catalan universitiesand the Department of Education coincided forthe most part, with the exception of the powersinvested in the Catalan government for layingdown guidelines. The universities set forth in theirstatutes, implicitly or explicitly, the main program-matic points of their science policy, which dealtwith the fundamental need to increase human,material and financial resources for research.

From a general perspective, the Department ofEducation (more specifically, the Directorate-Gen-eral of University Education) sought through its re-search development and promotion programmeto advance in the following lines of action:

– To achieve more decision-making power in theorientation of science policy in Catalonia.

– To provide support for the strategic coordina-tion and planning of university research.

– To promote priority lines and centres of excel-lence within universities.

– To continue the policy of creating and assistingcommon research support services and work-shops.

– To assist in the evaluation of the results of uni-versity research.

– To foster relations between university and society– To provide support for training and retraining

programmes and scientific exchanges for re-searchers.

– To gain insight into the reality and needs ofuniversity research and to encourage partici-pation in the programmes and projects of the


56

11 BOE (official Spanish government bulletin) No. 209, of 1/09/1983.12 DOGC No. 522, of 20/03/1985.

The devolution of powers ceased after the

completion of those necessary for the crea-

tion of the IRTA, and thus the research centres

of the Spanish Council for Scientific Research

(CSIC) were not devolved.

European Economic Community.– To deal with the repercussions of the develop-

ment of the new Law for the Promotion andGeneral Coordination of Scientific and Techno-logical Research.

4. New impetus

In spite of the circumstances mentioned in thesection above, the initiatives that the CIRIT haddeveloped from its creation up until that momenthad enabled it to make its presence felt in all theareas that made up the Catalan scientific andtechnological fabric. Its activities, together withthose of the Directorate-General of Universities,rendered these two bodies the main public fun-ders of scientific research in Catalonia.

In 1984 the steep rise in the CIRIT budget–which in three years had grown tenfold– was in-terrupted. The resources for executing sciencepolicy in Catalonia had not been transferred, andfurthermore, as a result of a deficient fundingsystem for the autonomous communities, the fi-nancial situation of the Catalan government wasdifficult.

The scenario was entirely different from that initial-ly envisaged, and required a new approach toCIRIT activity.

This marked the beginning of a long period, whichopened with some disquiet and uncertainty buteventually recovered an upward trend and culmi-nated in the creation of the Universities and Re-search Commission in 1992. During these years,the CIRIT underwent some far-reaching changes.

Considering the state of affairs described above,the CIRIT decided to base its activity on two mainaspects:

– Complementary action aimed at promoting thecountry's scientific activity and technological re-search.

– Emphasis on those aspects of scientific andtechnological activity that central governmentpolicies did not take into account and yet wasof relative importance in Catalonia.

After the turning point represented by the year1984, in 1985 the CIRIT was given new impetus:it was raised to the rank of directorate-general byDecree 365/1985, of 13 December 1985, on thereorganisation of the CIRIT.13 Its budget was backin keeping with the initial trend.

In order for the CIRIT to be able to carry out itstasks more effectively and efficiently, it was as-signed, as a body with decision-making powers,responsibility for defining, in accordance withCatalan government guidelines, the appropriatescience policy for Catalonia, and for supportingand promoting research and technological innova-tion. According to these principles it was the dutyof the CIRIT:

– To establish the general lines of action regardingresearch and technological innovation in Cat-alonia.

– To coordinate the various activities and pro-grammes of the departments of the Catalangovernment in the field of scientific researchand technological innovation.

– To represent the Catalan government in the cor-responding general functions, with regard to

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

57

13 Decree 365/1985 of 13 December 1985 (DOGC No. 631, of 31/12/1985).

science and technological innovation policy.– To draft an annual proposal for CIRIT expenses

and reach an agreement on their distribution.– To make a proposal for the distribution of re-

sources destined for the performance and pro-motion of research and technological innovationin Catalonia.

It was therefore the responsibility of the CIRIT notonly to coordinate Catalonia's science policy butalso to undertake all the necessary coordinationwith the science and technology policy of theSpanish government, in accordance with the prin-ciples and regulations of the Law for the Promo-tion and General Coordination of Scientific andTechnological Research.

Specifically, in 1987, despite limitations in the ap-plication of Article 6.2.c) of the aforementionedLaw 13/1986 on the Promotion and General Co-ordination of Scientific and Technological Re-search, Catalonia succeeded, through the CIRIT,

in getting its Fine Chemicals Programme14 accept-ed as being of interest for the National Scientificand Technological Research Plan, out of the 10presented by Catalonia through the CIRIT and the16 presented by the totality of Spain's au-tonomous communities.

The announcement for the Fine Chemicals Pro-gramme was published in 198915 and entailedfunding for projects worth 2,633 million pesetasover a total period of seven years, as shown inTable 1.

In 1986, in order to improve its funding, the CIRITSecretariat underwent internal restructuring,through Decree 141/198616, and new initiativescontinued to be promoted.

One of the most significant of these initiatives wasthe creation of the Biotechnology Agency of Cat-alonia, by Decree 140/1986, as a body attachedto the Department of the Presidency and grouped


58

14 BOE No. 167, of 14/07/1989.15 DOGC No. 1171, of 21/07/1989.16 Decree 141/1986 (DOGC No. 692, of 30/05/1986).

Table 1Figures for the Fine Chemicals Programme

Year Action 1* Action 2**

Requested Awarded Requested AwardedApplications Funding Applications Funding Applications Funding Applications Funding

1989 32 468,505,635 17 170,250,000 11 360,895,000 3 35,606,097

1990 19 233,122,297 15 139,100,000 4 94,000,000 3 47,800,000

1991 42 933,854,188 27 682,451,000 2 72,500,000 2 71,200,000

1992 63 1,011,555,671 26 340,000,000 3 86,900,000 1 31,200,000

1993 79 1,315,206,338 43 327,987,000 6 175,700,000 4 112,700,000

1994 70 696,216,832 32 186,377,000 5 158,900,000 1 28,000,000

1995 72 988,167,944 41 362,636,000 4 130,500,000 3 98,000,000

Total 377 5,646,628,905 201 2,208,801,000 35 1,079,395,000 17 424,506,097

* Research, infrastructure and special action projects.** Concerted projects.

within the CIRIT Secretariat. Its purpose was topromote development and technology transferaimed at obtaining products and services. Forthis reason, it was intended to assist the activityof Catalonia's research teams working in the fieldof biotechnology, through the promotion of basicresearch infrastructure, support services, pro-grammes and projects, and the promotion oftraining in biotechnology.

The Agency also sought to promote the devel-opment of biological techniques by encouragingtheir application and use. Its activities were car-ried out either on its own or in collaboration withresearch centres, enterprises, bodies and insti-tutions by means of the corresponding agree-ments.

Another of the new initiatives was the creation ofthe International Centre for Numerical Methods inEngineering Consortium, by Decree 150/1987. Itwas formed by the CIRIT and the Technical Uni-versity of Catalonia (UPC) with the aim of provid-ing support for this activity and incorporating thecentre into the international network of centres ofexcellence for computer applications in engineer-ing (INCCA).

In 1988, Decree 14417 attached the CIRIT Secre-tariat to the Department of Education, and it waschaired by the Catalan Minister of Education. Thesecretary was to have a rank equivalent to that ofa deputy director-general.

Heribert Barrera replaced Gabriel Ferraté as vice-president,18 and in turn Artur Bladé replaced Nar-cís Majó as secretary.19

It is important to stress the effort that was beingmade by the Directorate-General of Universitiesof the Department of Education, through itsTechnical Bureau, to back research in universi-ties, especially after 1985, when they were de-volved. However, in 1986 the impact was felt ofthe passing of the Spanish Law for the Promo-tion and General Coordination of Scientific andTechnological Research. A clear recovery couldbe seen in 1987, 1988 and 1989, through meas-ures in coordination with the CIRIT Secretariattogether with other new initiatives that were tohave a strong influence from that time on, suchas the calls for research training, research infra-structure and highly qualified staff at the Catalanpublic universities.

The evolution of the budget of the Technical Bu-reau can be seen in Graph 1 below.

As mentioned above, the Technical Bureau for Re-search was set up in 1980, and acted as the ex-ecutive body of the CIRIT Secretariat and the Sci-ence and Technology Board until the CIRITSecretariat itself was created in 1981. In 1982 theBureau began to carry out university research pro-motion work, and continued to do so until 1992,when it became part of the Directorate-Generalfor Research as a result of the creation of the Uni-versities and Research Commission. In 1994 itcame under the vice-presidency of the CIRIT, andbegan to perform study, advisory and technicaland administrative support functions for the Ple-nary Session and the Delegate Committee.

The Bureau's efforts in these areas coincided witha particularly interesting period, before the deploy-

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

59

17 Decree 144/1988 of 5 July 1988 (DOGC No. 1015, of 8/07/1988).18 Decree 350/1988, of 1 December 1988 (DOGC No. 1801, of 14/12/1988).19 Order of 4 January 1989 (DOGC No. 1095, of 20 /01/1989).

ment of the public university system; work waswell under way towards the creation of PompeuFabra and Rovira i Virgili Universities and the Uni-versities of Girona and Lleida, all soon to becomea reality. Specifically:

– Pompeu Fabra University, by Law 11/1990.20

– University of Lleida, by Law 34/1991.21

– University of Girona, by Law 35/1991.22

– Rovira i Virgili University, by Law 36/1991.23

An important step was taken in 1991 towards co-ordinating research and reorganising the CIRIT, bymeans of Decree 195/1991,24 of 16 September.

As of that moment, the functions of the CIRIT were:

– To plan, coordinate and evaluate activities in thefield of research and technological innovation inCatalonia.

– To draft a proposal for the Four-Year ResearchPlan, defining the objectives and strategic linesfor the development of research in Catalonia.

– To represent the Catalan government in thecorresponding functions with regard to sci-ence and technological innovation policy, es-pecially before the Spanish administration andregional and international administrations.

– All those other functions expressly assigned to


60

20 Law 11/1990 (DOGC No. 1308, of 22/06/1990).21 Law 34/1991 (DOGC No. 1541, of 15/01/1992).22 Law 35/1991 (DOGC No. 1541, of 15/01/1992).23 Law 36/1991 (DOGC No. 1541, of 15/01/1992).24 Decree 195/1991, of 16 September (DOGC No. 1504, of 11/11/1991).

* Data taken from the annual reports of the Technical Bureau for Research.

Graph 1Budget of the Technical Bureau for Research in the period 1982-1989*

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

01982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 19891988

Technical Bureau budget according to annual reports. In pesetas.

Millions

it by the Catalan government, on the basis ofits objectives.

The study, advisory and technical and administra-tive support functions performed for the PlenarySession and the Delegate Committee were in thehands of a consultancy depending directly onthe vice-president of the CIRIT. The CIRIT deter-mined the personnel and equipment needed for thefunctioning of this consultancy and could requesttemporary transfers of technical staff specialising inresearch and technological innovation manage-ment from other departments to the Bureau, in anevaluative and advisory role.

The functions of general planning, coordinationand funding were assumed by the CIRIT, whichwas to avail itself of the appropriate instrumentsof consultation, evaluation and study of R&D ac-tivities in Catalonia, whereas the managementfunctions were the responsibility of the depart-ments involved in the activities concerned, andthose of general research promotion belonged toa new body.

It was in this context that Decree 31825 createdthe Universities and Research Commission andregulated the organisation and distribution offunctions with regard to universities and research.

The universities and research powers until then inthe hands of the Department of Education wereassumed by the Department of the Presidency.The newly created Universities and ResearchCommission, dependent on the Department ofthe Presidency, took charge of the management,planning and execution of powers in this area, inaccordance with the guidelines set by the Cata-

lan government and under the orders of the headof the department to which it belonged.

The following bodies depended on the Commis-sion: Universities and Research Management, theDirectorate-General of Universities and the Direc-torate-General for Research.

It was the responsibility of the Directorate-Gen-eral for Research to execute the powers of theCatalan government in the following fields: gen-eral research promotion; the promotion of thecreation of scientific and technological researchcentres; the promotion of the participation of theCatalan universities in the research and trainingprogrammes of the European Economic Com-munity; the fostering of scientific and academicrelations between institutions within Cataloniaand elsewhere in the world; promotion and sup-port for enterprise-university relations; supportfor the Interuniversity Council of Catalonia in thesphere of scientific and technological research;the compilation of reports on proposals for the

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

61

25 Decree 318/1993 (DOGC No. 1690, of 4/01/1993).

In the the year 1992, the functions of general

planning, coordination and funding were as-

sumed by the CIRIT, whereas the management

functions were the responsibility of the de-

partments involved in the activities concerned,

and those of general research promotion

belonged to the newly created Universities

and Research Commission.

creation or abolition of university institutes; thedrafting of projects for regulations in the areasunder its responsibility; the performance ofthose functions assigned to it by the ResearchPlan passed by the Catalan government; andcollaboration and coordination with the CIRITand other Catalan government bodies con-cerned with the promotion and performance ofresearch in Catalonia.

The Deputy Directorate-General for Research andthe Technical Bureau for Research, both of whichdepended until then on the Directorate-General ofUniversities of the Department of Education, cameto be attached structurally and functionally to theDepartment of the Presidency and to depend onthe Directorate-General for Research.

The Biotechnology Agency of Catalonia (ABC), creat-ed by Decree 140/1986, of 10 May 198626, came todepend directly on the Director-General for Research.

The CIRIT budget was to be allotted by itemisedappropriation in the budget section correspondingto the Department of the Presidency.

The creation of the Commission coincided withthe dismissal of the appeal filed against the Lawfor the Promotion and General Coordination ofScientific and Technological Research on thegrounds of unconstitutionality.

Graph 2 shows the evolution of the CIRIT budgetas published in the Diari Oficial de la Generalitatde Catalunya (DOGC).


62

26 Decree 140/1986 of 10 May 1986 (DOGC No. 735, of 3/09/1986).

* In 1980 the allocation increased by 21M pesetas.In 1999 the budgets of the CIRIT and the DGR were unified.

Graph 2CIRIT budget as published in the DOGC for the period 1981-1998*

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

01980

CIRIT budget as published (pesetas.)

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1991 1993 19961995 19971990 1992 1994 1998

From its creation until 1983, the CIRIT multipliedits budget tenfold in the expectation of being ableto assume the transfers that had been scheduled.By 1984 the difficult financial situation due to thelack of effective transfers had become evident.Later on, in 1987 and 1988, the economic effectof the passing of Law 13/1986 took its toll.

From that moment on, a manifest and determinedeffort was made, as can be seen by the increase inthe budget, especially noticeable in the period1988-1995, which coincided with some regulationsand measures that we mentioned in the previoussection and the reader should be aware of here.

Specifically, we are referring to Decree 195/1991,which reoriented and focused the functions of theCIRIT, and Decree 318/1992, which set up the Co-mmission that entrusted the management tasksinvolved in research promotion to the Directorate-General for Research. These regulations meantthat the CIRIT budget, and also that managed bythe Technical Bureau for Research for the promo-tion of university research, came to form part ofthe newly created body.

However, on this point it can be very enlighteningto analyse the promotion activity that the CIRITcarried out from its beginnings until 1992. Table 2shows the various announcements that weremade for grants and scholarships.

5. Four-year research plans

The CIRIT had got the message sent by the newpolitical situation: it was no longer enough to pur-sue the basic promotion policy that it had beendeveloping on all fronts, despite its unquestion-able importance, later to be acknowledged in theevaluation of the 1st Research Plan, which inherit-

ed and validated some of the main programmesfrom this period.

It was now necessary to reinforce its structure anddevelop planning, coordination and representationactivities. The restructuring undertaken in this pe-riod was along these lines, and its positive resultsspeak for themselves.

From this time on, in accordance with the new ap-proach, the CIRIT was to focus much of its effort onpreparing and implementing the successive re-search plans that were intended as the main instru-ment to strengthen the general research and devel-opment policy of the Catalan government. Theresearch plans were conceived as an integratingand coordinating element for R&D activities, espe-cially in the public sector, and at the same time astimulus for complementary activities promotingspecial interest sectors and increasing and optimis-ing resources to the full in other sectors.

The objective of the 1993-1996 Research Plan,passed in 1993, was to carry on with the activi-ties that were already under way, aimed at givingstructure for the Catalan science and technologysystem.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

63

The research plans were conceived as an in-

tegrating and coordinating element for R&D

activities, especially in the public sector, and

at the same time a stimulus for complemen-

tary activities promoting special interest sec-

tors and increasing and optimising resources

to the full in other sectors.

1981 1982 1983 1984

Awards Amount Awards Amount Awards Amount Awards Amount

Study abroad scholarships 12 9,588,000 33 27,037,939 53 48,549,000 69 64,107,000

Grants for scientific and technical cooperation withEuropean regions (AIRE) - - - - - - - -

Stays abroad - - 80 11,998,000 186 30,804,000 142 31,223,000

Research grants 151 19,538,690 247 64,018,923 220 78,602,000

Grants for congresses 8 900,000 9 2,707,000 27 7,669,920 43 14,336,040

Grants at county level - - 7 5,250,000 7 5,000,000 8 6,000,000

Agricultural research scholarships - - - - - - 19 3,910,000

Graduate scholarships for research atpublic centres (for companies) - - - - - - - -

Graduate scholarships in suport ofR&D departments of SMEs in Catalonia - - - - - - - -

Scholarships for industrial supervisors and specialist technicians - - - - - - 23 9,660,000

Technological Innovation - - 4 40,000,000 6 44,100,000 5 12,576,583

Grants for sociolinguistic projects - - - - - - - -

Ferran Soldevila grants - - - - - - - -

Grants for research on the media and phenomenaof mass communication - - - - - - - -

Grants for preparing European projects - - - - - - - -

Grants to university departments for scientific journals - - - - - - - -

Grants for research on the European Communities - - - - - - - -

Grants for projects on Catalan terminology - - - - - - - -

Specialisation scholarships for doctoral researchers - - - - - - 14 14,280,000

Grants for studies on the labour market - - - - - - - -

Travel grants for participation in conferences, congresses,meetings and symposia on science, the humanities and technology - - - - - - - -

Grants for projects for introductin to research (CIRIT budget) - - - - - - - -

Fine Chemistry grants - - - - - - - -

Fine Chemistry predoctoral scholarships - - - - - - - -

Institutionals grants 15 30,000,000 - - 99 127,294,000 15 70,853,783

Priority lines - - 14 41,400,000 - - - -

Bibliographical collections 13 6,584,257 30 12,654,000 63 27,648,000 12 11,203,710

Encounters with Science - - - 7 7,000,000 29 10,956,761

Youth Prizes - - 100 2,600,000 100 2,600,000 100 3,000,000

CIRIT courses 18 3,000,000 9 5,000,000 13 5,000,000 10 5,000,000

CIDC Prizes - - - - - - - -

Stays in Quebec - - - - - - - -

Other action - - - - - - - -

«Ciència» journal 1 1,976,250 1 3,000,000 11 3,675,000 11 3,553,500

White Paper - - 1 1,500,000 1 2,500,000 1 4,000,000

Publications - - - - 6 3,776,573 20 13,431,168

Total 218 71,587,197 535 217,165,862 799 394,218,493 521 278,091,545

* Data taken from CIRIT documentation and archives in combination with DOGC publications.


64

Table 2Grants and scholarships managed by the CIRIT in the period 1981-1992*

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

65

1985 1986 1987 1988



Grants for scientific and technical cooperation withEuropean regions (AIRE) - - - - - - - -

Stays abroad 181 34,239,000 170 35,446,000 131 29,805,500 174 42,408,000

Research grants 237 80,288,000 234 69,787,000 220 70,315,000 229 76,529,000

Grants for congresses 54 12,762,535 73 17,545,048 49 17,407,746 13 4,750,000

Grants at county level 6 3,000,000 11 4,200,000 10 5,000,000 1 762,00

Agricultural research scholarships - - - - - - - -

Graduate scholarships for research at - - - - - - - -public centres (for companies) - - - - - - - -

Graduate scholarships in suport ofR&D departments of SMEs in Catalonia - - - - 40 28,800,000 43 30,960,000

Scholarships for industrial supervisors and specialist technicians 27 11,340,000 40 16,440,000 61 25,620,000 95 27,000,000

Technological Innovation 4 26,950,000 8 30,000,000 13 47,247,200 7 40,637,785

Grants for sociolinguistic projects 10 3,000,000 12 3,500,000 - - - -


Grants for research on the media and phenomenaof mass communication - - - - - - 6 1,775,000

Grants for preparing European projects - - - - - - - -

Grants to university departments for scientific journals - - - - - - - -

Grants for research on the European Communities - - - - 14 3,105,000 4 1,500,000

Grants for projects on Catalan terminology 11 4,889,000 22 7,096,000 10 3,288,000 9 3,000,000

Specialisation scholarships for doctoral researchers 11 10,850,076 - - - - - -

Grants for studies on the labour market - - - - 4 1,600,000 4 1,600,000

Travel grants for participation in conferences, congresses,meetings and symposia on science, the humanities and technology - - - - - - - -

Grants for projects for introductin to research (CIRIT budget) - - - - - - - -

Fine Chemistry grants - - - - - - - -

Fine Chemistry predoctoral scholarships - - - - - - - -

Institutionals grants 10 41,190,695 - - - - - -

Priority lines 5 4,845,000 - - - - - -

Bibliographical collections - - - - - - - -

Encounters with Science 31 16,794,701 15 8,092,924 14 8,456,208 14 12,420,766

Youth Prizes 100 3,000,000 100 3,000,000 100 4,000,000 80 5,400,000

CIRIT courses 24 6,000,000 23 5,000,000 32 6,772,093 29 7,600,000

CIDC Prizes 1 202,011 - - - - - -

Stays in Quebec 3 750,000 2 500,000 5 1,250,000

Other action - - - - - - - -

«Ciència» journal 5 2,757,500 8 2,097,804 25 4,448,884 12 2,478,404

White Paper - - - - - - - -

Publications 9 6,007,807 12 8,865,070 11 8,748,913 8 5,816,968

Total 787 327,256,669 808 277,675,846 806 324,530,544 798 324,408,923




66

1989 1990 1991 1992



Grants for scientific and technical cooperation withEuropean regions (AIRE) 45 13,258,200 36 14,911,000 54 35,634,000 135 14,862,000

Stays abroad 181 47,802,000 158 45,665,000 166 63,161,000 165 74,982,000

Research grants 200 80,000,000 172 79,550,000 213 108,540,000 - -

Grants for congresses 117 30,000,000 119 30,000,000 134 35,000,000 155 40,000,000

Grants at county level - - - - 18 7,280,000 32 10,000,000

Agricultural research scholarships - - - - - - - -

Graduate scholarships for research atpublic centres (for companies) 25 31,500,000 13 10,920,000 10 4,800,000 16 9,120,000

Graduate scholarships in suport ofR&D departments of SMEs in Catalonia 27 19,440,000 24 21,640,000 15 14,400,000 16 18,240,000

Scholarships for industrial supervisors and specialist technicians 40 12,000,000 44 15,840,000 47 27,620,000 70 43,200,000

Technological Innovation 3 21,700,000 13 30,530,000 16 29,615,000 45 135,400,000

Grants for sociolinguistic projects - - - - - - - -


Grants for research on the media and phenomenaof mass communication 6 1,620,000 8 1,800,000 8 1,800,000 7 2,000,000

Grants for preparing European projects 7 1,542,145 10 2,005,000 - - - -

Grants to university departments for scientific journals 24 925,615 20 1,173,898 - - - -

Grants for research on the European Communities 11 2,730,000 - - - - - -

Grants for projects on Catalan terminology 10 10,000,000 - - - - - -

Specialisation scholarships for doctoral researchers 5 8,100,000 11 19,800,000 15 27,200,000 17 32,640,000

Grants for studies on the labour market - - - - 3 1,500,000 - -

Travel grants for participation in conferences, congresses,meetings and symposia on science, the humanities and technology 95 2,903,500 226 7,160,000 178 12,216,000 - -

Grants for projects for introductin to research (CIRIT budget) - - 184 80,000,000 205 108,540,000 - -

Fine Chemistry grants 21 166,700,000 - 179,050,000 - - - -

Fine Chemistry predoctoral scholarships - - - - - - 25 25,125,000

Institutionals grants - - - - - - - -

Priority lines - - - - - - - -

Bibliographical collections - - - - - - - -

Encounters with Science 12 10,761,867 - 15,000,000 - - - -

Youth Prizes 95 6,450,000 95 7,000,000 95 6,000,000 90 6,700,000

CIRIT courses 44 7,703,216 8,535,900 25 6,443,900 21 5,742,505

CIDC Prizes) - - - - - - - -

Stays in Quebec - - - - - - - -

Other action - - - - 33 298,000,000 - -

«Ciència» journal - - - - - - - -

White Paper 1 4,807,661 - - - - - -

Publications 6 5,022,119 - 7,732,128 - - - -

Total 1043 549,966,323 1196 648,312,926 1326 916,236,900 893 605,850,505



CIRIT. 25 YEARS

67

However, other elements for the advancement ofR&D were also put into operation, including thecreation of a network of reference centres for re-search made up of the Biotechnology ReferenceCentre,27 the Food Technology Reference Centre,28

the Reference Centre for Research and Develop-ment in Language Engineering29 and the CatalanGovernment Reference Centre for Research andDevelopment in Advanced Production Technolo-gy30, as an instrument of coordination.

Another of these dynamising elements was thelaunching, through public announcements, of the-matic networks31 and research groups.32 A com-mittee was also set up to promote a synchrotronlaboratory in Catalonia, as one of the priority linesincluded in the Plan.

The 1st Plan and those that succeeded it wereevaluated by CIRIT support bodies, namely theAdvisory and Monitoring Committee33 and the Sci-ence and Technology Evaluation Board.

The evaluation of the 1st Plan focused on the Pre-doctoral Scholarships Programme (FI), the Mobili-ty Programme, the Infrastructure Programme andthe Fine Chemicals Programme.

With regard to the first of these programmes, itwas considered that it had satisfactorily fulfilled itsresearcher training objectives, by encouraging theproduction of doctoral theses, and that it had alsobeen very positive in providing support for re-search in Catalonia. Nevertheless, the number of

researchers was still below the European average,and it was important to maintain and increasepressure in this direction. The Mobility Programmewas also assessed satisfactorily, as it was regard-ed as having contributed positively to the interna-tionalisation of research. Likewise, it was foundthat the Infrastructure Programme had been im-portant for the scientific development of Catalonia.Lastly, the Fine Chemicals Programme, promotedand managed by the CIRIT, was judged to havebeen highly positive both for the university andcompany research groups and for the participationof the Catalan government, through the CIRIT.

In 1994, Decree 203,34 on research coordinationand the reorganisation of the CIRIT, restructuredthe Technical Bureau for Research, which came todepend directly on the vice-president of the CIRIT,under the orders of the CIRIT secretary, in order to

27 Government Accord of 26 July 1994 (DOGC No. 1969, of 7/11/1994).28 Government Accord of 16 November 1994.29 Government Accord of 5 July 1996 (DOGC No. 2237, of 31/07/1996).30 Government Accord of 5 July 1996 (DOGC No. 2237, of 31/07/1996).31 Resolution of 6 April (DOGC No. 1885, of 18/04/2006).32 Resolution of 5 November 1993 (DOGC No. 1821, of 15/11/1993).33 Order of 8 August 2001 (DOGC No. 3477, of 20/09/2001).34 Of 26 July 1994 (DOGC No. 1930, of 5/08/1994).

During the year 1993, appart from the research

plans, other elements for the advancement of

R&D were also put into operation, including

the creation of a network of reference centres

for research, the launching, through public an-

nouncements, of thematic networks and re-

search groups or the creation of a committee to

promote a synchrotron laboratory in Catalonia.

perform study, advisory and technical and admin-istrative support functions for the Plenary Sessionand the Delegate Committee. It depended organi-sationally on the Department of the Presidencyand was attached to the Universities and Re-search Commission. The CIRIT could requesttemporary transfers of technical staff specialisingin research and technological innovation manage-ment from other departments to the Bureau, in anevaluative and advisory role.

The basic functions of the Technical Bureau forResearch were as follows:

– To lend study, advisory and technical and admin-istrative support services to the CIRIT, both in re-lation to the exercising of the functions entrustedto the CIRIT by the Catalan government and in re-lation to the development of the Research Plan.

– To prepare the annual report on the Plan.– To prepare reports on the suitability of new pro-

posals for the Research Plan.– To coordinate the management of Research

Plan activities and the various agents that takepart in their development.

In this way, the Technical Bureau for Research re-covered its original link with the CIRIT, in spite ofthe change in functions.

In 1997, a Government Accord was made publicwhereby the 2nd Research Plan for Catalonia(1997-2000) was passed. Its aim was to consoli-date the model initiated by the 1st Plan and thestructure of the system, with special emphasison the transfer and use of scientific and techno-logical knowledge. Although it yielded positive re-sults, the Plan suffered the economic restrictionsimposed by the need to meet the conditions ofEuropean convergence and participation in theeuro zone.

In the year 2000, through Decrees 12335 and127,36 the Department of Universities, Researchand the Information Society (DURSI) was createdand structured. Its president was the President ofthe Catalan government, the vice-president wasthe minister responsible for the DURSI, and thehead of the CIRIT, a post occupied by Antoni Oli-va,37 came to have the organisational rank of di-rector-general. In turn, the Technical Bureau forResearch came to depend on the Directorate-General for Research, and its functions were:

– To assist the director-general and the CIRIT inthe drafting of the Research Plan for Catalonia.

– To lend study, advisory and technical and ad-ministrative support services to the CIRIT andthe director-general.

– To provide support for the director-general andthe CIRIT in the evaluation and monitoring ofmeasures taken in connection with research.

A Government Accord was made in 2001 thatpassed the 3rd Research Plan of Catalonia (2001-2004). The Plan focused on the European Re-search Area and the specific goals of improving


68

35 Decree 123/2000, of 3 April (DOGC No. 3112, of 3/04/2000.36 Decree 127/2000, of 3 April (DOGC No. 3113, of 4/04/2000).37 Decree 255/2000, of 24 July (DOGC No. 3200, of 8/08/2000).

In the year 2000, the Department of Universi-

ties, Research and the Information Society

(DURSI) was created and structured.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

69

the organisation and coordination of the R&D pro-grammes of the Member States, increasing themobility of human resources, planning major facili-ties, providing incentives for enterprise to invest inresearch and technological innovation, and mak-ing an effort to bring science closer to citizens.

The 3rd Plan set up the Advisory, Monitoring andEvaluation Board (CASA). The CASA, in its reflec-tions on the 2nd Plan, considered that the cre-ation of the three new structures in compliancewith the 1st Research Plan (i.e., research groups,thematic networks and R&D reference centres)had increased the vitality of the public researchsystem, and that the 2nd Plan had consolidatedthese structures. The consolidated researchgroups had made for the cohesion of the groupsand the configuration of the research map in Cat-alonia. The thematic networks had stepped upcollaboration between groups in the same field.The Network of Reference Centres had enabledthe Catalan government to promote strategicthemes. Further still, the development of centresand major facilities was judged to be one of themost positive contributions of the 2nd Plan.

It was also found that EU policy at that time wasseeking to narrow the gap between Europe and theUSA in development and technological innovation.The action taken by the European Union was direct-ed at large corporations, whereas the Catalan gov-ernment targeted small and medium-sized enter-prises, for which technological innovation was vital.The initiatives taken in the development and tech-nology transfer programme were a step in the rightdirection, but funds were insufficient. They neededto be enhanced with tax incentives, but that de-pended to a large extent on central government.

With the restructuring of the DURSI in 2004, byDecree 313/2004,38 the Interdepartmental Re-search and Technological Innovation Commissionwas renamed Interdepartmental Research andTechnological Innovation Board (CIRIT). The bodyretained its high political profile; it continued to bechaired by the President of the Catalan govern-ment, and the first vice-president was still the min-ister responsible for the DURSI. In addition, twomore vice-presidencies were created; the secondwas occupied by the Minister of Employment andIndustry and the third by the Minister of Health.Furthermore, the CIRIT was equipped with a Sci-ence Committee and a Social Committee as advi-sory bodies for consultation on any aspect relatedto research and innovation policy in Catalonia.Lastly, its functional organisation was restructuredwith a view to fulfilling its new strategic objectives.

By Decree 132/2004,39 Marta Aymerich was ap-pointed director of the CIRIT.

As of that moment, the functions of the CIRIT canbe divided into three main lines of action:

1. Planning, coordination and evaluation of R&Dand innovation policy. With the coordination of

38 Decree 313/2004 of 8 June (DOGC No. 4151, of 10/06/2004).39 Decree 132/2004 of 20 January (DOGC No. 4055, of 23/01/2004).

With the restructuring of the DURSI in 2004,

the Interdepartmental Research and Techno-

logical Innovation Commission was renamed

Interdepartmental Research and Technologi-

cal Innovation Board.

the CIRIT, the 2005-2008 Research and Inno-vation Plan (PRI) was passed in January 2005,research and innovation thus being encom-passed in the same plan for the first time. Es-sentially, the Plan was devised jointly by the De-partment of Universities, Research and theInformation Society (DURSI) and the Depart-ment of Employment and Industry (DTI). TheDepartment of Health also took part in the pro-cess, and the rest of the departments of theCatalan government made their contribution.

The objectives of the Plan included raising thequality of research, with particular attention toemerging disciplines and frontier fields, andpromoting innovation in the whole of the Cata-lan production system.

The PRI incorporates two new features: it en-courages research to feed the potential of prior-ity economic sectors, and it benefits collabora-tive structures between major infrastructures,universities, research centres and businesses,for the development of local production environ-ments in emerging and interdisciplinary fields.

Again in the planning line, in compliance with themandate of the Catalan Government Accord of 5April 1994, concerning the communication of in-formation between the departments and bodiesof the Catalan government for the annual pro-gramming of R&D activities, the CIRIT collectsthis information, supplied by the coordinatorsand collaborators of each department. Table 3shows the data for the years 2001-2004.

2. Involvement in the European Research Area.The CIRIT, according to the Decree restructur-ing the DURSI, of 8 June 2004, defines the ac-tivities of the Office of the European Knowledge

Area (OEEC) with regard to the European Re-search Area.

One of the foremost activities in this field hasbeen the creation of the European and Interna-tional Projects Service (SPEI), with the aim ofencouraging full Catalan participation in the Eu-ropean Research Area and promoting the returnof European funds to Catalonia. The SPEI,which forms part of the OEEC, has the supportand financial backing of the CIRIT and the Inter-university Council of Catalonia (CIC).

In the framework of the Pyrenees-Mediter-ranean Euroregion, set up in 2004 as a joint ini-tiative by the autonomous governments ofAragon, Catalonia and the Balearic Islands andthe regional councils of Languedoc-Roussillonand Midi-Pyrénées, the CIRIT contributes to thedevelopment of the university and science Eu-roregion. This is understood as a sphere, withinthe European and global context, that meetsthe needs of the Euroregion as a knowledge so-ciety, strengthening cooperation in terms of thenew production economy.

The CIRIT also promotes the EuroBIOregion.This project is intended to provide added valuefor the regions involved (Aragon, Catalonia, theBalearic Islands, Languedoc-Roussillon andMidi-Pyrénées), and for Europe as a whole. Theaim is to reinforce the development of biotech-nology and health sciences in the Pyrenees-Mediterranean Euroregion and establish al-liances between the regions, particularly theBioRegion of Catalonia and the Pôle of Toulouse,and to yield future opportunities for the BalearicIslands, Languedoc-Roussillon and Aragon.

In addition, within the framework of the promo-tion of the BioRegion of Catalonia, a protocol


70

has been signed to set up EuroBioClusterSouth, a metacluster formed by several Euro-pean bioregions, specifically the axis Barcelona-Lyon-Milan-Geneva-Munich-Heidelberg.

Lastly, by way of fulfilment of the Mobility, Co-operation and Internationalisation Programmeestablished by the PRI, in 2005 the CIRIT con-tributed to the international promotion of Cat-alonia as a country of high-quality research.Contacts have been made with South Korea in

this field for the first time, while the cooperationstarted up in previous years with Quebec hascontinued, with specific agreements enablingthis cooperation to meet new needs.

3. Promotion of dialogue and collaboration be-tween society, the scientific community and theadministration. In this direction, the CIRIT hasworked on the projects of the BioRegion, theTechnoRegion (Tic.Cat) and the KnowledgeTransfer Consortium.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

71

Table 3Funding of research and innovation by the deparments of the Catalan government*

Departments 2001 2002 2003 2004

Agriculture and Fisheries 8,805,563.84 9,390,197.85 9,290,234.26 15,078,517.99

Welfare 2,015,747.80 2,920,591.13 5,147,461.48 1,939,120.39

Trade, Consumer Affairs and Tourism (1) (1) (1) 0.00

Culture (2) 2,705,707.46 2,273,059.19 2,402,076.82 2,422,626.81

Economy and Finance 451,423.42 471,958.23 398,809.57 474,234.50

Educació 3,096,777.32 2,780,434.14 2,991,288.60 3,707,142.00

Governance and Public Administrations (3) 358,258.70 427,419.95 449,994.76 109,397.00

Interior 637,903.68 1,676,438.10 725,691.01 672,887.66

Justice 212,984.18 139,225.59

Environment and Housing (4) 4,863,021.61 4,447,025.35 3,402,408.19 4,756,216.97

Regional Policy and Public Works (5) 4,277,674.59 5,125,252.70 4,131,409.15 4,533,352.92

Presidency (6) 657,898.71 1,166,648.93 830,583.09 2,652,662.71

Institutional Relations and Participation (7) (7) (7) (7) 757,889.70

Health* 56,933,876.65 61,067,969.88 65,879,699.00 78,311,348.00

Employment and Industry (8) 12,631,174.91 21,958,670.03 16,128,309.40 15,874,008.56

Universities, Research and the Information Society 212,746,771.93 233,617,265.60 259,496,487.28 294,258,037.97

Total 310,394,784.80 347,322,931.08 371,274,452.61 425,686,668.77

(1) Until 2003 formed part of the Department of Industry.(2) In 2004 lost TERMCAT, Language Policy, and Sports, which went to Presidency.(3) In 2004 lost Institutional Relations.(4) In 2004 gained Housing.(5) In 2004 lost Housing.(6) In 2004 gained TERMCAT, TERMCAT, Language Policy, and Sports.(7) Until 2003 only a small part of Institutional Relations existed, within the Department of Governance.(8) In 2001, Department of Trade and Tourism plus Department of Industry; in 2002 and 2003 Department of Employment, Industry, Trade, ConsumerAffairs and Tourism.*Data supplied by the CIRIT, taken from the 2005 annual report of the Department of Unviersities, Research and Information Society.

The Catalan government, with the coordina-tion of the CIRIT, took on the role of facilitatorin order to get the BioRegion of Catalonia proj-ect off the ground; it was constituted as a pri-vate foundation on 14 February 2006. During2005, with legal advice from the departmentsinvolved in the project, work went ahead withthe definition of its legal structure in the formof a private foundation, its bylaws were draft-ed, an outline Strategic Plan was drawn up,and data were managed and compiled on thebiomedical and biotechnological sector in Cat-alonia. Work was also done on the corporateimage and the web site. The objective of theBioRegion of Catalonia is to consolidate Cat-alonia as an international point of reference inbiomedicine and biotechnology, with researchexcellence, a competitive business fabric, anda sturdy and dynamic knowledge transfersystem. The foundation will manage its visua-lisation, communication strategy and value-creating activities, both within Catalonia andinternationally.

With regard to the TechnoRegion, the CIRIThas promoted, in collaboration with variousdepartments of the Catalan government, theTic.Cat project, the purpose of which is tofoster research and innovation in the field ofthe information and communication technolo-

gies (ICT) in order to concentrate research ca-pacity, attract international companies and in-stitutions, stimulate the development of newbusinesses and the improvement of existingones, and endorse Catalonia internationally asa leading European region in ICT. As part ofthe project, in coordination with the CIRIT, ablueprint has been drawn up on the basis offieldwork conducted with the actors in the ICTsector in Catalonia and an internationalbenchmarking study performed by a group ofexperts.

As regards the Knowledge Transfer Consortium(CTC), the Catalan government adopted theAccord for its constitution and the passing of itsbylaws on 14 June 2005, with the aim of pro-moting the transfer of scientific knowledge gen-erated in universities and research centres tothe social and productive fabric, with the collab-oration of all the agents involved in this process.The CTC was formed by the Catalan govern-ment, through the Department of Universities,Research and the Information Society (DURSI)and the Department of Employment and Indus-try, together with all Catalonia's universities. TheCTC has started to function, it has been pre-sented to the range of institutions and corpora-tions that make up the science-technology-enterprise system in Catalonia, and its corporateimage has been defined.

Lastly, we will mention the science and businessinnovation promotion bill, passed by GovernmentAccord on 28 February 2006. The project ratifiesthe importance of the Interdepartmental Re-search and Technological Innovation Board as abody for coordinating the activity of the variousdepartments of the Catalan government in thesespheres.


72

The Catalan government, with the coordina-

tion of the CIRIT took on the role of facilitator

in order to get the BioRegion of Catalonia

project off the ground; it was constituted as a

private foundation on 14 February 2006.

At present the CIRIT is linked to the Departmentof Education and Universities, because of the lat-est restructuring of the Catalan government40. Itsdirector is Ramon Agustí i Comes, according tothe Government Accord of 20 June 2006.

The CIRIT's role of promoter of research plans asa driving force for research and development poli-cy is unquestionable, especially in the light of the2005-2008 Research and Innovation Plan, whichwas conceived with the intention of enhancing thecapacity of cooperation and interaction betweenthe various actors: government, enterprise and

universities. In this direction, the CIRIT has workedparticularly hard to encourage dialogue and col-laboration, and to become prominent within theEuropean Research Area.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

73

40 Decree 212/2006 of 23 May 2006 (DOGC No. 4641, of 25/05/2006).

The CIRIT’s role of promoter of research

plans as a driving force for research and de-

velopment policy is unquestionable, espe-

cially in the light of the 2005-2008.

References

CIRIT (COMISSIÓ INTERDEPARTAMENTAL DE RECERCA I INNOVACIÓ TECNOLÒGICA) AND CASA (CONSELL D’ASSESSORAMENT, SEGUIMENT I AVALUA-CIÓ). Informe d'avaluació del II Pla de recerca de Catalunya. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. CIRIT, November 2003. Accessibleat: http://webtest1.gencat.es/pricatalunya/recursos/avaluacioiiprc2.pdf. Consulted 12 July 2006.

CIRIT (COMISSIÓ INTERDEPARTAMENTAL DE RECERCA I INNOVACIÓ TECNOLÒGICA). Pla de Recerca de Catalunya 1993-1996. Barcelona: Gene-ralitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidència. Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca, May 1993.

CIRIT (COMISSIÓ INTERDEPARTAMENTAL DE RECERCA I INNOVACIÓ TECNOLÒGICA). II Pla de Recerca de Catalunya 1997-2000. Barcelona: Ge-neralitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidència. Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca, February 1997. Accessible at:http://www10.gencat.net/dursi/ca/de/arxiu_plans/pla2_0.htm. Consulted 12 July 2006.

CIRIT (COMISSIÓ INTERDEPARTAMENTAL DE RECERCA I INNOVACIÓ TECNOLÒGICA). III Pla de Recerca de Catalunya 2001-2004. Barcelona: Ge-neralitat de Catalunya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, July 2001.Accessible at: http://www10.gencat.net/dursi/ca/de/arxiu_plans/pla3_1.htm. Consulted 12 July 2006.

CIRIT (COMISSIÓ INTERDEPARTAMENTAL DE RECERCA I INNOVACIÓ TECNOLÒGICA). Pla de Recerca i Innovació de Catalunya 2005-2008. Gene-ralitat de Catalunya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, May 2005.Accessible at: http://www10.gencat.net/pricatalunya/. Consulted 12 July 2006.

DEPARTAMENT D’UNIVERSITATS, RECERCA I SOCIETAT DE LA INFORMACIÓ. Memòria del Departament 2000. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalu-nya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, September 2001.


74

DEPARTAMENT D’UNIVERSITATS, RECERCA I SOCIETAT DE LA INFORMACIÓ. Memòria del Departament 2001. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalu-nya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, June 2002.

DEPARTAMENT D’UNIVERSITATS, RECERCA I SOCIETAT DE LA INFORMACIÓ. Memòria del Departament 2002. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalu-nya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, July 2003.

DEPARTAMENT D’UNIVERSITATS, RECERCA I SOCIETAT DE LA INFORMACIÓ. Memòria del Departament 2003. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalu-nya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, June 2004.

DEPARTAMENT D’UNIVERSITATS, RECERCA I SOCIETAT DE LA INFORMACIÓ. Memòria del Departament 2004. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalu-nya. Departament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació, July 2005.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1985. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, May 1988.


DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1987. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, September 1989.


DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1990. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, February 1992.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1992. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, December 1993.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1993. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, November 1994.



DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1996. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, April 1998.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1997. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, February 1999.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1998. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, March 2000.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 1999. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, March 2001.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 2000. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, January 2003.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 2001. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, July 2003.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció del Govern de Catalunya 2002. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Presidèn-cia, June 2004.

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

75

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció de Govern de la Generalitat de Catalunya. Gener-juny 1981. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya.Departament de Presidència, 1981.

DEPARTAMENT DE LA PRESIDÈNCIA. Acció de Govern de la Generalitat de Catalunya. Juliol-desembre 1981. Barcelona: Generalitat de Cata-lunya. Departament de Presidència, 1982.







GABINET TÈCNIC DE RECERCA DE LA DIRECCIÓ GENERAL D’ENSENYAMENT UNIVERSITARI. El Foment de la Recerca Científica i Tecnològica1982-1985. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament d'Ensenyament, December 1986.

GABINET TÈCNIC DE RECERCA DE LA DIRECCIÓ GENERAL D’ENSENYAMENT UNIVERSITARI. El Foment de la Recerca Científica i Tecnològica1986-1989. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament d'Ensenyament, October 1990.

INSTITUT D’ESTUDIS CATALANS. La Recerca Científica i Tecnològica a Catalunya, 1990. Barcelona: Institut d'Estudis Catalans, October 1990.

«La Constitució de la Comissió Interdepartamental de Recerca i Innovació Tecnològica». Revista Catalana de (Ciència) i Tecnologia, vol.1, No. 5/6, pp. 107-108, Barcelona: Ciència, S.A., 1981.


76

DOGC

DECREE 217/1980 Of 5 November, creating the Interdepartmental Research and Technological 93 of 12.11.1980Innovation Commission

DECREE 232/1950 Of 18 November, on the organisational structure of the Department of Education 96 of 26.11.1980

DECREE 282/1980 Of 1 December, developing the organisational structure of the Department of Education 101 of 17.12.1980

DECREE 476/1981 Of 14 December, reorganising the Interdepartmental Research and Technological 193 of 22.01.1982Innovation Commission (CIRIT)

DECREE 307/1982 Of 8 September, on new initiatives by the Interdepartmental Research and 262 of 29.09.1982Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT) in the field of technological innovation

DECREE 456/1982 Of 10 December, on initiatives by the Interdepartmental Research and Technological 288 of 24.12.1982Innovation Commission (CIRIT) in Priority Research Lines

ORDER Of 28 June 1983, passing the bylaws of the Science and Technology Board 349 of 29.07.1983

DECREE 279/1984 Of 6 September, restructuring Presidency 472 of 26.09.1984

ROYAL DECREE On the devolution of services from the State Administration to the Catalan Autonomous 522 of 20.03.1985305/1985 Government with regard to universities

DECREE 365/1985 Of 13 December, reorganising the Interdepartmental Research and Technological 631 of 31.12.1985Innovation Commission (CIRIT)

LAW 23/1985 Of 28 November, creating the Institute for Food and Agricultural Research and Technology 621 of 04.12.1985

DECREE 141/1986 Of 9 May, structuring the Secretariat of the Interdepartmental Research and 692 of 30.05.1986Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT)

DECREE 200/1986 Of 4 July, restructuring the Secretariat-General of the presidency and creating 712 of 11.07.1986the Deputy Secretariat-General

DECREE 140/1986 Of 10 May, creating the Biotechnology Agency of Catalonia 735 of 03.09.1986

DECREE 150/1987 Of 13 March, constituting the International Centre for Numerical Methods 841 of 20.05.1987in Engineering Consortium

DECREE 144/1988 Of 5 July, partially redistributing the powers and functions corresponding 1015 of 08.07.1988to the departments of the Catalan Autonomous Government

ANNEX:

Legislation consulted

Document Legislation consulted

CIRIT. 25 YEARS

77

DECREE 322/1988 Of 14 November, modifying Decree 365/1985 of 13 December, reorganising the 1071 of 21.11.1988Interdepartmental Research and Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT)

ORDER Of 17 July 1989, publicly announcing a resolution of 5 July 1989 by the Interministerial 1171 of 21.07.1989Science and Technology Commission for the awarding of grants for the Fine ChemicalsProgramme in Catalonia

ORDER Of 28 September 1989, publicly announcing the rules of procedure of the 1205 of 11.10.1989Interdepartmental Research and Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT)

DECREE 195/1991 Of 16 September, on the coordination of research and the reorganisation of the CIRIT 1504 of 11.10.1991

DECREE 318/1992 Of 28 December, creating the Universities and Research Commission and regulating 1690 of 04.01.1993the organisation and distribution of functions with regard to universities and research

GOVERNMENT Of 23 February 1993, passing the Research Plan of Catalonia for the period 1993-1996ACCORD

DECREE 89/1993 Of 9 March, creating the Committee for the promotion of a synchrotron laboratory 727 of 29.03.1993in Catalonia

DECREE 173/1993 Of 12 July, creating the Steering Committee for the organisation of the Administration of 1771 of 16.07.1993the Catalan Autonomous Government and the Interdepartmental Coordinating Committee

ORDER Of 1 February 1994, creating the Advisory and Monitoring Committee and the Science 1859 of 11.02.1994and Technology Evaluation Board as CIRIT support bodies for the development of theResearch Plan of Catalonia (1993-1996)

DECREE 26/1994 Of 8 February, creating the Catalan Autonomous Government Network of ReferenceCentres for research and development 1862 of 18.02.1994

DECREE 122/1994 Of 30 May, modifying Decree 318/1992, of 28 December, creating the Universitiesand Research Commission and establishing its structure 1904 of 03.06.1994

RESOLUTION Of 30 June 1994, delegating functions to the manager for universities and research 1921 of 15.07.1994

DECREE 203/1994 Of 26 July, modifying Decree 195/1991, of 16 September, on the coordination of research 1930 of 05.08.1994and the reorganisation of the CIRIT, and structuring the Technical Bureau for Research

RESOLUTION Of 26 October 1994, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 26 July 1994, 1969 of 07.11.1994accepting and designating the Biotechnology Centre as a Catalan AutonomousGovernment reference centre for research and development and including it in theCatalan Autonomous Government Network of Reference Centres

GOVERNMENT Of 5 April 1994, concerning the communication of information betweenACCORD the departments and bodies of the Catalan Autonomous Government for the annual

programming of R&D activities

RESOLUTION Of 23 November 1994, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 16 November 1981 of 05.12.19941994, accepting and designating the Food Technology Centre as a Catalan AutonomousGovernment reference centre for research and development and including it in theCatalan Autonomous Government Network of Reference Centres



78

RESOLUTION Of 12 July 1996, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 5 July 1996, 2237 of 31.07.1996concerning the Catalan Autonomous Government Reference Centre for Researchand Development in Language Engineering

RESOLUTION Of 12 July 1996, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 5 July 1996, 2237 of 31.07.1996concerning the Catalan Autonomous Government Reference Centre for Researchand Development in Advanced Production Technology

RESOLUTION Of 4 February 1997, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 30 January 1997, 2333 of 18.02.1997passing the 2nd Research Plan of Catalonia (1997-2000)

ORDER Of 10 June 1997, creating the Advisory and Monitoring Committee and the Science and 2415 of 18.06.1997Technology Evaluation Board as CIRIT bodies for scientific and technological evaluation,consultation and monitoring of the 2nd Research Plan of Catalonia (1997-2000)

DECREE 49/1999 Of 23 February, creating the Science and Technology Advisory Committee 2839 of 03.03.1999

DECREE 87/1999 Of 23 March, modifying Decree 195/1991, of 16 September, on the coordination of 2864 of 09.04.1999research and the reorganisation of the CIRIT

RESOLUTION Of 10 November 1999, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 13 October 1999, 3025 of 29.11.1999concerning the Catalan Autonomous Government Reference Centre for Research andDevelopment in Aquaculture

RESOLUTION Of 10 January 2000, publicising the collaboration agreement between the Science and 3062 of 24.01.2000Technology Office (OCIT) of the Presidency of the Government and the InterdepartmentalResearch and Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT) to promote synchrotronlight activities

DECREE 123/2000 Creating the Department of Universities, Research and the Information Society 3112 of 03.04.2000

DECREE 127/2000 Of 3 April, structuring the Department of Universities, Research and the Information Society 3113 of 04.04.2000

ORDER Of 8 August 2001, creating the Advisory, Monitoring and Evaluation Board as an 3477 of 20.09.2001Interdepartmental Research and Technological Innovation Commission (CIRIT) body

RESOLUTION UNI/918/2003, of 7 March, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 4 March 2003, 3866 of 16.04.2003accepting and designating the Reference Centre for Research and Development inAdvanced Materials for Energy (CeRMAE) as a Catalan Autonomous Governmentreference centre and including it in the Catalan Autonomous Government Networkof Reference Centres for R&D

RESOLUTION UNI/919/2003, of 7 March, publicly announcing the Government Accord 3866 of 16.04.2003of 4 March 2003, accepting and designating the Reference Centre for Bioengineeringof Catalonia as a Catalan Autonomous Government reference centre and including itin the Catalan Autonomous Government Network of Reference Centres for R&D

RESOLUTION UNI/920/2003, of 7 March, publicly announcing the Government Accord of 4 March 2003, 3866 of 16.04.2003accepting and designating the Reference Centre for Analytical Economics (CREA)as a Catalan Autonomous Government reference centre and including it in the CatalanAutonomous Government Network of Reference Centres for R&D


CIRIT. 25 YEARS

79

RESOLUTION UNI/940/2003, of 9 April, creating the Special Initiative for the Development of 3867 of 17.04.2003Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Catalonia

DECREE 313/2004 Of 8 June, restructuring the Department of Universities, Research 4151 of 10.06.2004and the Information Society

DECREE 212/2006 Of 23 May, structuring the Department of Education and Universities 4641 of 25.05.2006

BOE

ORGANIC On University Reform 209 of 01.09.1983LAW 11/1983

RESOLUTION Of 4 July 1989. Agreement with the Interministerial Science and Technology 167 of 14.07.1989Commission for the funding, management and execution of the AutonomousCommunity «Fine Chemicals» Programme


102Creating new technologicalknowledge: Analysis of asurvey of inventors inCataloniaWalter García-Fontes

90Barcelona Science Park(PCB): Research andinnovation exchangebetween universities andthe private sectorSusana Herráiz, RosinaMalagrida i Fernando Albericio

82The Barcelona BiomedicalResearch Park (PRBB).Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert iTeresa Badia

n o t e s

1. Introduction

The Barcelona Biomedical Research Park will placeCatalonia in a greatly improved position to competeat different European and international levels in thefield of science. Spain figures as the eighth mosteconomically developed country in the world,whereas it is only eleventh in terms of science and

biomedical research. Despite recent endeavours, itis still not on a par with the leading countries in thisfield, and a wide chasm separates it from them at atime when competition is becoming increasingly in-tense. More continuity and greater effort in thecommitment to R+D and Innovation is required ofpoliticians in order for Spain to keep abreast ofdevelopments and retain the position it holds.

CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11 NOTES

82

* Jordi Camí is the PRBB General Manager.** Reimund Fickert is the PRBB Project Manager.*** Teresa Badia is the PRBB Communications Manager.

THE BARCELONA BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH PARK

Jordi Camí*, Reimund Fickert** and Teresa Badia***

Following a period of twenty years during which the necessary scientific infrastructure for a major European fa-cility was set up and a five-year construction period, the Parc de Recerca Biomèdica de Barcelona (PRBB,Barcelona Biomedical Research Park) was inaugurated in May 2006. The PRBB, with an outstanding criticalmass, prominent research staff and a markedly international character, is a campus for knowledge-intensive pro-duction in the fields of biomedicine and the health sciences.

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Structure and organisation

3. Human capital

4. The scientific programme

5. A new stage and new commitments


83

The PRBB is not the only biomedical science facili-ty in the Barcelona metropolitan area. In addition tothe Hospital del Mar, which is located next to thePRBB, there are five other large hospitals of scien-tific importance in the conurbation; the HospitalClínic de Barcelona (together with the August Pi iSunyer Biomedical Research Institute, IDIBAPS),and the Vall d’Hebrón, Sant Pau, Bellvitge and CanRuti (Germans Trias i Pujol) Hospitals. There arealso other biomedical research institutions spon-sored by the Generalitat de Catalunya (Govern-ment of Catalonia), some of them linked to theabove-mentioned hospitals, and important contri-butions in the field are also made by the Universitatde Barcelona and the Universitat Autònoma deBarcelona, particularly the UB Science Park andthe new Institute of Biomedical Research, locatedin the Park. It is to be expected that, within a shortperiod of a few years, the magnificent facilities ofthe PRBB will be just one of various in the Catalansystem of science, technology and innovation.

2. Structure and organisation

The PRBB is a consortium set up jointly by the Gen-eralitat de Catalunya (through the three governmentdepartments of Universities, Research and the In-formation Society; Health; and Economy), the Ajun-tament de Barcelona (Barcelona City Council) andthe Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF). It consists of ascientific infrastructure that brings together variousindependent institutions and research centres, to-gether with different technology platforms, the pur-pose of which is to fulfil scientific objectives in the

field of biomedicine and the health sciences. Thesix research centres that form part of the PRBB are:

The Institut Municipal d’Investigació Mèdica(IMIM, Municipal Institute of Medical Research),1

which was reopened in 1985, is a research centreof the Institut Municipal d’Assistència Sanitària(IMAS) that also has links to the Universitat Pom-peu Fabra. The IMIM also includes the researchgroups working at the Hospital del Mar. The currentDirector is Dr. Miquel Lopez Botet.

The Centre de Recerca en Epidemiologia Am-biental (CREAL, Centre for Research into Environ-mental Epidemiology)2 was set up in 2006 by theGeneralitat de Catalunya, with the participation ofthe IMAS and the UPF. The Director is Dr. JosepMaria Antó.

The Departament de Ciències Experimentals ide la Salut de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra(CEXS-UPF, Department of Experimental andHealth Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra)3 wasset up in 1998 and provides teaching staff for bio-medical studies at the UPF (Bachelor in Human Bi-

1 <http://www.imim.es>.2 <http://www.creal.info>.

The PRBB is set up jointly by the Generalitat

de Catalunya, the Ajuntament de Barcelona

(Barcelona City Council) and the Universitat

Pompeu Fabra (UPF).

ology, PhD in the Health and Life Sciences, and var-ious different Master’s programmes, including Pub-lic Health). The Director is Dr. Fernando Giráldez.

The Centre de Regulació Genòmica (CRG,Genome Regulation Centre)4 is a Catalan govern-ment-sponsored centre (Ministry of Education andUniversities, and the Ministry of Health) set up in2000, with the participation of the Universitat Pom-peu Fabra (an attached institute since 2005). TheDirector is Dr. Miguel Beato.

Scientific activities at the Centre de MedicinaRegenerativa de Barcelona (CMRB, BarcelonaRegenerative Medicine Centre)5 began in 2005.This is a Catalan government-sponsored centre(Ministry of Health) and it is also receives fundingfrom the Spanish Ministerio de Salud y Consumo.The Director is Dr. Juan Carlos Izpisúa.

The Institut d’Alta Tecnologia (IAT, Institute ofHigh Technology),6 a foundation in which the CRChealth corporation, IMAS, the Hospital Clínic and theVall d’Hebron Hospital all participate, offers biomed-ical imaging technologies. It currently has a cyclotron

and PET tomography (positron emission tomogra-phy) for use on both humans and test animals.

The aggregate operating budget of these six cen-tres and the PRBB Consortium is approximately 55to 60 million euros per year. An average of 40% ofthis figure is obtained by researchers and institu-tions themselves through service contracts andcompetitive grants from public sources in Cataloniaand Spain, as well as Europe and North America.

In terms of the scientific and technical services, theresources for bioinformatics specialists are partic-ularly outstanding at the PRBB’s centres. A large-scale calculation capacity facilitates scientific linkswith the Centre de Supercomputació de Catalunya(CESCA, Catalan Supercomputing Centre) as wellas the Mare Nostrum supercomputer, a phase 1clinical trials unit, various advanced electronics mi-croscopy units, flow cytometry systems (fluores-cence activated cell sorter or FACS), micro-positronemission tomography (MicroPET), and also micro-array, genome, and proteomic and peptide syn-thesis services, amongst others. With regard totechnology platforms, of particular importance isthe locating in the PRBB of various nodes of theSpanish Genotyping Centre (CEGEN)7 (includingthe central coordinating centre) and the SpanishBioinformatics Institute (INB),8 both of whichwere set up and are funded by the FundaciónGenoma España. Another important platform isthe Catalan Anti-doping Laboratory, a branch ofthe IMIM that was accredited in 1990 by the In-ternational Olympic Committee, and in 2003 bythe World Anti-doping Agency (WADA);9 most of


84

3 <http://www.upf.edu/cexs>.4 <http://www.crg.es>.5 <http://www.cmrbarcelona.org/>.6 <http://www.iat-prbb.com>.7 <http://www.cegen.org>.8 <http://www.inab.org/>.9 <http://www.wada-ama.org>.

The aggregate operating budget of the six

centres that constitute the PRBB and the

PRBB Consortium is approximately 55 to 60

million euros per year.

the laboratory’s service activity work involves sam-ples of international origin.

The PRBB will also extend the scope of R+D andInnovation of private enterprise in the health sector,particularly pharmaceuticals and biotechnology.This was the case, for example, with the multina-tional GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in 2003, when it opt-ed to establish the Centre d’Imatge en Psiquiatria(Centre for Imaging in Psychiatry) in facilities at theHospital del Mar that are connected to the PRBBnext door. The centre is involved in the clinical de-velopment of all of GSK‘s new psychotropic drugsin Europe, and was located near to the PRBB dueto the stage 1 biomedical imaging and clinical trialsfacilities available from the Institut Alta Tecnologia(IAT) and the Institut Municipal d’InvestigacionsMèdiques (IMIM). The PRBB also has facilities forbio-incubators and there are currently two spin-offcompanies that have developed from the IMIM,Pharmatools and Chemotargets.

The PRBB combines infrastructure excellencewith a plan for scientific cooperation and manage-ment between the various participating researchentities. The PRBB Consortium is specifically re-sponsible for the Park’s asset management, jointservices and scientific and technical services, pro-moting the highest level of scientific coordinationbetween research groups in the different centres,deploying instruments for the technological trans-fer of acquired knowledge, cooperative involve-ment in the park’s external projection, and net-working with other similar centres and facilities.The running of the PRBB as a coordinated systemwill allow for more rational plans regarding the lay-out and use of facilities and infrastructures to beset up, and within the framework of the PRBB acooperative operational model is used that iscompatible with and respectful of the autonomyand policies of each individual centre.

One of the most complex services offered by thepark to its research centres is the animal facility,which is distributed in two units. There is a specificpathogen free (SPF) facility core with a surface areaof approximately 3,000 square metres, which in-cludes specific facilities for generating transgenicmice, with space to house up to 60,000 mice, andone facility of around 300 square metres for Xeno-pus and zebra fish. A second facility core, knownas the conventional animal facility, is around 1,000square metres in size and has laboratories thatspecialise in behaviour.

One of the PRBB Consortium’s most importantmissions is its responsibility to attract and establishsynergistic agreements for collaborations with in-dustry and to set up R+D and Innovation pharma-ceutical and biotechnology companies in facilitiesset aside for this purpose. The PRBB Consortium’steam of professionals cooperates with technicalexperts at the technology transfer offices at eachPRBB centre, organising and sponsoring trainingcourses for technical experts and entrepreneurs,amongst others. One example of this is the recentlyestablished Science and Innovation ManagementStudies (SIMS) programme.

Organised by the PRBB, the SIMS is an initiative ofthe UPF’s Economics Department, with the collabo-ration of the Institut d’Educació Contínua (IDEC, In-stitute of Continuing Education). The aim of the SIMSis to create an exclusive environment in Barcelona tofoster intrasectoral interaction in training and corpo-rate development. The programme will be used toimprove skills and levels of knowledge by reinforcinginnovation and corporate initiatives.

The programme is divided into four modules:

– Key issues in biotechnology management.– Copyright, licensing and other factors for creat-


85

ing securities.– Funding, collaborations, mergers and strategic

alliances in the biotechnology sector.– Strategy for carrying out clinical trials, and ap-

proval to market new drugs.

SIMS courses are sponsored by the CataloniaBioRegion and the Fundación BBVA.

All PRBB centres and technology platforms are lo-cated in a new, technologically highly advancedbuilding. As far as the arrangement of the centresinside the new building and the distribution andtechnical adaptation of the physical space is con-cerned, priority has been given to physically locat-ing research groups near to each other, accordingto the affinity of the different fields of scientific spe-cialisation, and the lay-out of sole and combineduse areas for joint services and scientific and tech-nical services. Seventy percent of the total 50,000square metres are laboratories and offices de-signed specifically for scientific use. Funds for thefull investment, which comes to more than 110 mil-lion euros, have been contributed by the PRBBConsortium members, namely, the Generalitat deCatalunya, the Ajuntament de Barcelona and theUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (through the Generali-tat’s University Investment Plan for 2001-2006), aEuropean structural funds grant (FEDER) and a re-

fundable loan granted by the Spanish Ministerio deEducación y Ciencia (for the 2006-2007 period),part of which is to be offset by the Generalitat.

3. Human capital

By the end of 2006, there will be more than 1,000people working at the various different PRBB cen-tres, including scientific personnel, pre-doctoralstudents, and technical, administration and servic-es staff, distributed in eighty independent researchgroups. This body of workers represents an out-standing critical mass that is comparable with themain scientific clusters in Europe and, with nearlythirty different nationalities represented, will facili-tate an extraordinary interrelationship between dif-ferent disciplines and the possibility of carrying outscience from a totally different perspective.

A large number of the research groups are led bydistinguished researchers who have trained andworked in leading international centres. Scientistsfrom around the world are also currently being at-tracted to the PRBB where the working languagein most research groups is English. Practically allthe research groups at the PRBB centres collabo-rate with foreign research groups on a regular ba-sis, 70% of which are with European and Americangroups. 30% of published articles on original re-search include the co-authorship of a scientist in aforeign group.

One of the root causes of the progressive interna-tionalisation of research carried out at the PRBB isthe PhD programme in Health and Life Sciences of-fered at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra. The doctor-al programme has three pathways (basic research,clinical research, and epidemiological research andpublic health) and a series of compulsory modulesthat are common to all students, irrespective of


86

One of the root causes of the progressive in-

ternationalisation of research carried out at

the PRBB is the PhD programme in Health and

Life Sciences offered at the Universitat Pom-

peu Fabra. The compulsory modules and basic

research pathway are given entirely in English.


87

their pathway. The compulsory modules and basicresearch pathway are given entirely in English,which makes it attractive to students from Europeand currently more than half of the 270 registeredstudents are foreign. The international character ofthe PRBB is additionally being consolidatedthrough the steady recruitment of senior scientificstaff from other European countries and the UnitedStates, in part through the ICREA programme.10

This steady recruitment of foreign scientists wouldhave been unthinkable ten years ago, yet it has nowbecome a priority objective, especially in the re-cently opened centres like the Genome RegulationCentre and the Centre for Regenerative Medicine.

4. The scientific programme

The present time is a challenging moment for bio-medical research. Following the sequencing of thehuman genome, we are witnessing the appearanceof new paradigms and new areas of knowledge, par-ticularly in biology and systems medicine, bioinfor-matics and regenerative medicine. Despite any boldexpectations that one may have, however, it is sensi-ble to assume that it will take much longer than is ap-parent in order to achieve applicable objectives. Nev-ertheless, the twenty-first century will undoubtedly bea time marked by developments in human biology.

In the field of general knowledge, one very importantchallenge will be to understand what makes us allsimilar and what makes us different, what our com-ponents are as a kind and, in short, what the conse-quences of our biodiversity are. The above-men-tioned new fields of knowledge will help us to betterunderstand the similarities and differences betweendifferent human groups and between the humanand other animal species. In the field of medicine,

scientific objectives are being directed at a betterunderstanding of the enigmas of life and how wecan live more healthily and with a higher quality oflife. These are generic objectives that will give us abetter understanding of many chronic and acute ill-nesses and of the relationship between geneticsand the environment, and between our surround-ings and predispositions.

The research groups at the PRBB centres are sen-sitive to all of these challenges, and a large numberof the groups include specialists in the new areas ofknowledge. In this context, the main fields of re-search being developed at PRBB centres includebioinformatics and systems biology, genome regu-lation and epigenetics, cellular and developmentalbiology (including regenerative medicine), pharma-cology and clinical physicopathology, human ge-netics and evolutional biology, and epidemiologyand public health. As is evident from the scope ofthese six fields of science, the PRBB brings togeth-er expert scientists from molecular science to popu-lation studies and basic to applied research, includ-ing clinical and translational research.

The PRBB is an open scientific environment wherethere is a great willingness to interrelate. In 2005alone, more than two hundred researchers fromabroad and other centres in Spain took part in oneor more of over four hundred scientific sessions or-ganised by the Centre de Regulació Genòmica, theInstitut Municipal d’Investigació Mèdica, the UPF’sDepartament de Ciències Experimentals i de laSalut, and the PRBB itself.

One particularity, and one veritable added value ofthe PRBB, is its physical proximity to and close rela-tionship with the Hospital del Mar. Its proximity gen-erates interrelationships between laboratory re-

10 <http://www.icrea.es>.

search groups and clinical research groups and,more specifically, it gives rise to research and transferprojects being set up. For example, clinical researchgroups at the Hospital del Mar, through the IMIM,have offices and laboratory facilities in the PRBB.The fact that researchers coexist together at thePRBB and yet approach their work from such differ-ent perspectives has led, for example, to relationsbeing established between different researchgroups working on basic research and epidemiolo-gy. Not only is the coexistence of research groupswith such diverse approaches a source of greaterscientific productivity, but it is also the great asset un-derpinning the PRBB’s infrastructure.

The PRBB and its centres are also closely associat-ed with the Catalonia BioRegion initiative, a link be-tween administrations, the academic sector and in-dustry to promote the generation of new corporateinitiatives in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology,enhance R+D and Innovation capabilities of local in-dustry, and build alliances between all stakeholdersinvolved in the pharmaceuticals and biotechnologysector and the healthcare industry in general.

The convergence of systems biology, genomics,computer science, proteomics and personalisedmedicine has led to the threshold of a new age in thedevelopment of new drugs. Given the lack of a keyunderstanding to the genetic, molecular and cellularbasis of most illnesses, together with the extremecomplexity of present-day biomedicine, the needfor scientific collaboration between highly diversedisciplines is greater than ever. This puts the PRBBin a very favourable position in that a wide range ofscientific collaboration can be offered between thePRBB’s centres themselves and also with the phar-maceutical and biotechnology industry to coverparticularly relevant issues in present-day biomed-ical research. For example, the Spanish GenotypingCentre’s (CEGEN)11 nodes at the PRBB constitutean extraordinarily useful service for studies in per-sonalised medicine and research into the geneticbasis of illness. Moreover, the high density of re-search groups working in bioinformatics at thePRBB’s centres12 makes it possible to offer capabili-ties that extend from genome sequencing totelemedicine to computer-aided drug design. ThePRBB’s centres also have various different addition-al tools to offer pharmaceutical R+D and Innovation,including the large-scale capability to carry out pop-ulation studies, evaluate the effectiveness of newhealthcare technologies, carry out pharmacologicaldevelopment studies on healthy volunteers, andeverything deriving from the extensive biomedicalimaging technology based on positron emission to-mography (PET) and nuclear magnetic resonance,a technology that can be applied to both clinicalstudies and research into animal experimentation.

To sum up, the scientific approach of the PRBB’s re-search groups is at the cutting edge of biomedicalresearch, with special attention being given to new


88

11 <http://www.cegen.org>.12 <http://www.imim.es/GRIB>.

The coexistence of research groups with di-

verse approaches is a source of greater scienti-

fic productivity and puts the PRBB in a very fa-

vourable position in that a wide range of

scientific collaboration can be offered between

the PRBB’s centres themselves and also with the

pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry.

emerging areas, while the commitment of the PRBBitself is to carry out useful research for the health of allcitizens and to produce a new generation of applica-ble knowledge.

5. A new stage and new commitments

The different centres of the PRBB, each one in accor-dance with its own scientific objectives, collectivelyabide by commitments to continue producing scien-tific research of excellence and the best post-gradu-ate scientific training programmes and environments.The launching of the PRBB with a new large scientificfacility in Catalonia however also carries with it theneed to adopt new commitments. Complementary tothe aims and objectives of the centres themselves, thePRBB management’s proposal is to be instrumentaland committed to act in the three following areas:

Firstly, the commitment to integrity. The ambition toundertake research of excellence calls for renewedethical values on the part of the scientists. They mustbe excellent in terms of research quality and, aboveall, strict in preventing any problems regarding integri-ty. Exploitation of the defenceless does occur in thefield of science, and the clash of interests can also oc-cur, and it is down to the scientific community to pro-vide itself with self-regulatory instruments. ThePRBB’s code of good practice, which has been inplace since 2000, is a pioneer in Spain as a whole.13

The code consists of behaviour benchmarks and therules of the game that researchers freely adopt andare explained in an established way in the PhD pro-gramme to research personnel in training. The inten-tion is to broaden and give impetus to this existingcommitment within the context of the PRBB by refor-mulating the code of good scientific practices and ex-tending it to all the centres.

The second commitment is that of the economic de-velopment of Catalonia. Together with the CataloniaBioRegion, the intention of the PRBB is to contributeto the focusing of industry and services in Cataloniaon activities that are knowledge intensive by takingon the obligation to transfer the knowledge andtechnology that are generated and the commitmentto generate opportunities for setting up new compa-nies and supplying knowledge for the pharmaceuti-cal and healthcare industry. The wish is that work atthe PRBB be instrumental in bringing about achange in the academic culture in the field of bio-medicine in order for there to be an appropriate bal-ance between the generating of knowledge and itstransfer, and openly helping entrepreneurs. From theinfrastructure point of view, the PRBB managementis committed to making more space available in theneighbourhood of the new complex so that compa-nies in the sector wishing to benefit from its enor-mous scientific potential can locate nearby. In this re-gard and in collaboration with the CIDEM, there arejoint arrangements at the Barcelona Science Park(Universitat de Barcelona) and the 22@Barcelonadistrict to obtain specific infrastructures, such asmore space for bioincubators and specific facilitiesfor the post-incubation stage.

The third commitment is to society itself in Catalonia.The PRBB‘s unique building must avoid becomingan ivory tower, and knowledge produced at thePRBB be shared with the citizens. In addition to opendays and school visits, encouragement will be givenso that scientists at the PRBB’s centres also have thetime to transform the results of their research into alanguage that can be readily understood and is edu-cational, into something that can be useful for learn-ing and for illustrating and discussing ideas. Sciencemust form part of our wider culture and this is one ofthe goals of the PRBB.


89

13 <http://www.imim.es/CBPC/cat.pdf>.

BARCELONA SCIENCE PARK: RESEARCH AND INNO-

VATION EXCHANGE BETWEEN UNIVERSITITIES AND

THE PRIVATE SECTOR

Susana Herráiz*, Rosina Malagrida**, Fernando Albericio***

The Barcelona Science Park (Parc Científic de Barcelona, hereinafter PCB) was created by the University ofBarcelona with the support of the Fundació Bosch i Gimpera and Caixa Catalunya. It concentrates leadingpublic research groups, innovative companies, and powerful scientific and technological infrastructures in asingle physical area. This area is to be enlarged this year, so as to further encourage interdisciplinary re-search and research excellence in biomedicine and biotechnology, not to mention in other fields such as theexperimental, human and social sciences. New mechanisms are also to be established to ensure that the know-ledge generated in the PCB filters down to society, by means, for example, of the creation of companies andthe development of specific technologies that will contribute to improving quality of life.

Contents

1. Why a science park?

2. A scientific environment

3. PCB research: interdisciplinarity

4. The PCB as technology centre

5. Innovation and transfer

6. Fostering synergies

7. Communicating science

8. A second phase of growth ...


90

* Susana Herráiz is Science Communicator for the Comunication and Diffusion Division of the Parc Científic de Barcelona (PCB).** Rosina Malagrida is Head of the Comunication and Diffusion Division of the Parc Científic de Barcelona (PCB).*** Fernando Albericio is Director General of the Parc Científic de Barcelona (PCB).

1. Why a science park?

The need to adapt universities to the social andeconomic environment of today is a particularlycomplex issue from the point of view of researchand the transfer of its results to society, mostparticularly, to the business sector. It was in thiscontext that the University of Barcelona (UB)took a pioneering step in 1994, when its Boardof Governors agreed to reserve an area for thefuture creation of a science park –to be calledthe Parc Científic de Barcelona (PCB)– as an in-frastructure that would promote interaction be-tween the public and private sectors, thereby fa-cilitating conversion of the knowledge generatedby universities into wealth and quality of life.

The project began to take shape with the crea-tion of a foundation –the Fundació Parc Científicde Barcelona– in 1997, composed initially of theUB, the Fundació Bosch i Gimpera and CaixaCatalunya, and subsequently joined by the De-partment of Universities, Research and the Infor-mation Society of the Autonomous Governmentof Catalonia (the Generalitat) and the ConsejoSuperior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC).

Other universities followed this lead and are nowalso channelling knowledge transfer throughscience parks; some examples include the Pom-peu Fabra University (UPF) and the Parc de Re-cerca Biomèdica, the University of Girona andthe Parc Científic i Tecnològic, and the Autono-mous University of Barcelona (UAB) and the UABParc de Recerca.

The aims of the PCB are to promote public andprivate research excellence, to establish an ef-

fective system for knowledge transfer betweenthe public and private sectors by creating an ap-propriate environment for university and publicresearch centres, private sector R+D units andnew technology-based companies, and to makeavailable technological infrastructures that facili-tate scientific activities.

With a current occupancy rate of 100% and withsignificant demand for the units to be built in thesecond construction phase, it can be consideredthat the UB has realised its aim of creating a lo-cus for encounters between the entrepreneurialspirit of the academic sector and the innovativespirit of the business sector.

The PCB, moreover, has played a key role in theprocess of coordinating biomedical and biotech-nological R+D and Innovation. This it has done inBarcelona through the creation of the AliançaBiomèdica de Barcelona in conjunction with theParc de Recerca Biomèdica, the Institut d’Inves-tigacions August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS) and theUAB, at the regional level through the creation ofthe BioRegió de Catalunya, and finally, at theEuropean level with its participation in the Euro-pean Council of BioRegions. These initiativesrespond to the objective of promoting research

BARCELONA SCIENCE PARK: RESEARCH AND INNOVATION EXCHANGE BETWEEN UNIVERSITIES AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR

91

The University of Barcelona (UB) took a pio-

neering step in 1994, when its Board of Gover-

nors agreed to reserve an area for the future

creation of a science park.

excellence in the life sciences, thereby creating afavourable environment for the transfer of know-ledge and technology and for the consolidationof a business fabric for these disciplines, with theultimate goal of contributing to economic andsocial development.

2. A scientific environment

The PCB is located on the UB Diagonal Cam-pus, in the midst of a number of UB and Univer-sitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) faculties.Also located here are CSIC laboratories, a num-ber of business schools, the Hospital Sant Joande Déu, and the C4 Centre de Computació i Co-municació de Catalunya, as also academic facili-ties such as libraries, computer communicationsnetworks, etc. Together, these entities configurean environment that fosters creativity and the de-velopment of knowledge and applications thatadd further value to the PCB. The academicworld, moreover, also benefits from the sciencepark, in that contact with the business sectorreshapes its research efforts and leads, to givejust one example, to the creation of technology-based spin-off enterprises.

Occupying a total surface area of 26,000 m2, thePCB is currently home to over 50 public researchgroups, 30 companies and 23 scientific/technolo-gical entities, distributed among four buildings, the

largest of which is the Modular Building (20,000m2), allocated to laboratories and scientific/tech-nological installations.

The PCB is also home to a high proportion of re-search staff (over 1,250 individuals in total) cover-ing a wide range of professional profiles, many ofwhom are from outside Catalonia. They includeresearchers at the PCB, UB, UPC and CSIC, re-searchers participating in labour market insertionprogrammes (Institució Catalana de Recerca i Es-tudis Avançats (ICREA ), Ramón y Cajal, TorresQuevedo, Juan de la Cierva and Beatriu de Pi-nós), and post-graduate university students.

The PCB has solidly established itself, moreover, asa favourable environment for the creation of publicresearch centres that coordinate and promote re-search excellence, such as, for example, the Institutde Recerca Biomèdica (IRB) –which was the firstsuch centre to acquire legal standing– and the Ins-titut de Bioenginyeria de Catalunya (IBEC).

3. PCB research: interdisciplinarity

The PCB’s scope of activity focuses particularlyon emerging research fields such as chemistry,pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and nanobioen-gineering, both in the public sector –representedmainly by the IRB, IBEC and the Institut de Biolo-gia Molecular de Barcelona (IBMB) attached toCSIC– and in the private sector.

The IRB is the largest research entity located inthe PCB. Managed by the researchers Joan J.Guinovart and Joan Massagué, its aims are topromote multidisciplinary research excellence inthe interface between biology, chemistry andmedicine, and to encourage cooperation with lo-cal bodies and international research centres.


92

The PCB is a a locus for encounters between

the entrepreneurial spirit of the academic

sector and the innovative spirit of the busi-

ness sector.

Consisting of 25 research groups and employingsome 300 researchers, the IRB focuses primarilyon the frontiers of biomedical knowledge in fivepriority areas, namely, Structural and Computa-tional Biology, Chemical and Molecular Pharma-cology, Molecular Medicine, Cellular and Devel-opmental Biology, and Applied and TranslationalOncology. Research in these fields has led, forexample, to studies of the mechanisms respon-sible for cancer metastasis and of new therapeu-tic targets for neurodegenerative diseases (suchas Alzheimer’s) or metabolic diseases (such asdiabetes).

The IBEC is a pioneering multidisciplinary bodythat pursues research into the application of thenanotechnologies to biomedicine in fields suchas Cellular Biology, Nanobioengineering, Biome-chanics, Cellular Biophysics, Biomaterials, Tis-sue Implants and Engineering, Medical SignalProcessing and Instrumentation, and Roboticsand Biomedical Imaging.

These activities are carried out by 50 researchers–led by Josep A. Planell (UPC) and Josep Sami-tier (UB)– in conjunction with researchers fromother universities and with researchers contract-ed under labour market insertion programmesfor doctors and research technicians. Amongprojects being implemented by the IBEC is thedevelopment of tools necessary for nanometric-scale operations (nanotweezers and complextechnologies for the detection and observation ofatoms and molecules), nanocapsules for directingmedication to a specific therapeutic target, andtechnologies for differentiating stem cells for tis-sue regeneration purposes.

The IBMB-CSIC is pursuing research into the mo-lecular and genetic mechanisms involved in biolo-gical processes of relevance to the physiology of

living organisms and their development. Two par-ticular departments of this entity are located inthe PCB: the Department of Cellular Biology andthe Department of Structural Biology.

As for the business sector, the PCB is home toR+D and Innovation units for established compa-nies –including the Merck Farma i Química Biore-search Laboratory and the Esteve, Medichemand Quimera Ingeniería Biomédica units, to justmention a few– and also to new start-up andspin-off companies such as Advancell, KymosPharma Services, CrystaX Pharmaceuticals, En-antia, ERA Biotech, Oryzon Genomics and Ole-oyl-Estrone Development. Finally, new formulaefor cooperation between established companiesand PCB research groups or technology plat-forms have been developed at the PCB, exam-ples of which include the mixed Almirall Prodesfar-ma-PCB, Lilly-PCB and Pharma Mar-PCB units.

The PCB also undertakes research in conjunc-tion with the Protein Structure and Modellingnode of the Instituto Nacional de Bioinformática(a Genoma España initiative), the UB’s Centrede Recerca en Química Teòrica, the UB’s Grupde Recerca de Neurociència Cognitiva, and thePCB’s Laboratori del Clima. The PCB also fos-ters research in foods through the Institut deNutrició i Seguretat Alimentària (INSA) attachedto the UB.


93

As for the business sector, the PCB is home to

R+D and Innovation units for established com-

panies and also to new start-up and spin-off

companies.

The PCB has, moreover, fostered the develop-ment of a multidisciplinary environment for fieldssuch as the social sciences, humanities, law andeconomics, by hosting centres and observato-ries that carry out research and training and thatstudy topical issues such as bioethics and glo-balisation. It is also home to companies in themeteorology, computation and language, mate-rials design and intellectual property fields.

4. The PCB as technology centre

The first phase of the PCB construction projectinvolved a high level of technological investment,with 5,000 m2 dedicated to powerful scientificand technological infrastructures and specialistresearch support services. This equipment andthe PCB’s highly specialist technical workforcehave earned the PCB a reputation as a highlycompetitive landmark technology centre. Dedi-cated primarily to the pharmaceutical and finechemistry industries, it offers quality services to

research groups located in the PCB, as also toother public research groups and businesses inthe sector. The centre is also home to biotech-nological platforms and PCB science services,as well as to certain elements of the UB Scienceand Technology Service (SCT-UB).

The PCB modelled its biotechnology platforms onthe French plateformes de recherche created byresearch and innovation legislation passed in1999, with the concept of technology platformsadapted to the biotechnology, biomedicine andpharmaceutical chemicals fields. The newness ofthe application fields –for which a traditional ser-vice focus is inadequate– requires platforms toactively participate in research projects, networks,technology development projects and partner-ships that, in terms of time and complexity, go be-yond those provided by traditional services.

The PCB, the SCT-UB and IDIBAPS betweenthem manage a total of seven platforms, whichtogether constitute a highly advanced technologyservice in areas such as proteomics, transcripto-mics, combinatorial chemistry, fine chemistry,nanotechnology, crystallography and toxicology.New network-based structures have been crea-ted, moreover, under the auspices of the UBGroup, for some of these platforms. Called mixedbiotechnology platforms, they aim to optimise theuse of technology resources and highly qualifiedhuman capital.

Among the scientific services offered by the PCB,of particular note are the services offered for ge-neral use (darkrooms, cell/tissue culture rooms,centrifugal rooms, etc.), a 920 m2 animal facilitywith a pathogen-free area for genetically modi-fied organism maintenance, a radioactive faci-lity, a transgenesis unit, and a special reactionsservice.

The SCT-UB, which is a support centre for re-search into the life sciences, is composed of 24technical units, 12 of which are located in thePCB, among them, the 800MHz Nuclear Magne-tic Resonance Unit (catalogued by the Spanishgovernment as a medium-sized scientific insta-


94

The PCB’s scientific and technological infra-

structures and its specialist research support

services together with it highly specialist

technical workforce offer quality services to

public research groups and businesses.

llation) and the Genomics, Confocal and Electro-nic Microscopy and Flow Cytometry units.

5. Innovation and transfer

The PCB has as its aim to reduce or eliminatethe gap that exists between the academic andbusiness sectors, in which the notions of market-ing, protection of property rights, services andexternalisation are understood in very differentways. The PCB represents, thus, a pole of inno-vation for new business ideas, the developmentof entrepreneurship, and the creation of publicR+D technology-based businesses.

Furthermore, together with the Centre d’Innovacióde la Fundació Bosch i Gimpera, the Agència deValorització i Comercialització dels Resultats de laInvestigació (AVCRI) and the Centre de Patents,the PCB is a member of the UB Group, which fos-ters basic research and technology transfers fromuniversities to the productive sectors, thereby en-deavouring to raise the level of R+D and technolo-gical innovation in the private sector.

The Centre d’Innovació de la Fundació Bosch iGimpera provides technology services, assists indeveloping research projects and supports thecreation of spin-off businesses. It also encour-ages the development of an entrepreneurial spiritthrough specific tutoring and monitoring pro-grammes for research groups, and is responsi-ble, with the UB Centre de Patents, for the com-mercialisation of patents originating in UBresearch groups.

The AVCRI is a new UB Group structure which hasas its ultimate aim the coordination and promotionof the transfer, valuation and commercialisation ofresearch results in all areas of knowledge.

Located also in the PCB is the UB Centre de Pa-tents which, in addition to carrying out researchand training in the industrial property rights area,manages, together with researchers, the patentapplication process on behalf of the UB.

The entities within the UB Group aim to activelyparticipate in R+D and Innovation policy-makingfor the newly created European Research Area,which aims to foster greater cooperation betweenuniversity and business research, develop newways for the public and private sectors to inter-act with each other, facilitate the creation of high-level technology platforms that promote basic re-search and technological innovation in companies,and undertake initiatives that lead to the creationof technology-based and academic spin-offcompanies.

The first bioincubator

In 2003, the UB, the PCB and the Generalitat–through its business development centre, theCentre d’Innovació i Desenvolupament Empresa-rial (CIDEM)– launched a project to construct the


95

The PCB together with the Centre d’Innova-

ció de la Fundació Bosch i Gimpera, the

Agència de Valorització i Comercialització

dels Resultats de la Investigació (AVCRI)

and the Centre de Patents, are the members

of the UB Group, which foster basic research

and technology transfers from universities

to the productive sectors.

first bioincubator in Spain (the CIDEM-PCB Bio-incubator), with the ultimate aim of facilitating thecreation of new spin-off technology-based com-panies originating in research implemented in thepublic sector. To ensure their sustainability andcompetitivity, companies participating in this pro-ject are provided with quality premises, scientificand technological support infrastructures, busi-ness management services and financial support.

Over the last three years, five companies havecome to form part of the CIDEM-PCB Bioincuba-tor– CrystaX Pharmaceuticals, Enantia, Era Bio-tech, Oleoyl-Estrone Developments and OryzonGenomics, all UB and CSIC spin-off companies–and six further companies will shortly be incor-porated.

At the international level, and with a view to pro-moting new forms of international support for thecreation of new businesses, the CIDEM-PCBBioincubator signed a framework cooperationagreement in September 2003 with the QuebecBiotechnology Innovation Centre (QBIC), a busi-ness incubator located in Biotech City in the La-val area of Quebec.

6. Fostering synergies

Among the aims of the PCB is to encourage thecreation of synergies between the different enti-

ties located in the park, whether public or pri-vate. One of its most successful initiatives hasbeen the creation of mixed units consisting ofbusinesses and PCB-based research groupsand technology platforms. Examples include theAlmirall Prodesfarma-PCB, Lilly-PCB and Phar-ma Mar-PCB mixed laboratories, which imple-ment research into new drugs.

Moreover, concentration in the PCB of public re-search centres and businesses operating in thesame research areas has enabled a broad rangeof synergies to be developed between the twosectors. These have taken the form of a numberof agreements entered into between PCB com-panies and with other highly reputable business-es in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and finechemistry sectors.

Among the projects facilitated by the PCB in thisrespect is the creation, in cooperation with the UBBrain Bank, of an innovation platform betweenPCB-based biotech companies (Oryzon Geno-mics, Advancell and Crystax Pharmaceuticals)and Esteve, aimed at developing a drug to treatdementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), which is thesecond most frequent senile dementia illness afterAlzheimer’s.

Association between these companies –awardedthe Business Cooperation Distinction by the PremisBarcelona d’Ofici Emprenedora– was made possi-ble by funding provided by a Generalitat pro-gramme aimed at fostering this kind of cooperationso that R+D is both more focused on social needsand encourages the participation of local compa-nies. The project was facilitated by the existence ofspin-off companies specialising in different newdrug development stages, which, in this particularcase, worked closely with established companiesin the PCB, with the PCB itself acting as catalyst.


96

In 2003, the UB, the PCB and the Generalitat

launched a project to construct the first bioin-

cubator in Spain, the CIDEM-PCB Bioincubator.

Another example of the synergies resulting fromthe PCB biomedical R+D and Innovation frame-work is the involvement of a range of PCB-basedtechnology platforms, mixed units, researchgroups and businesses in the implementation ofthree projects (Genius Pharma, ONCNOSIS andNanoFarma) that have received subsidies underthe Spanish Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Tra-de CENIT (Consorcios Estratégicos Nacionales enInvestigación Técnica) programme, aimed at pro-moting R+D+I cooperation between businessesand public research centres. Total subsidies willamount to close to 50 million euros, a sum repre-senting 46.4% of the budgets for the projects.

With a total budget of 40 million euros, the Ge-nius Pharma project -headed by pharmaceuticalcompanies (Almirall, Esteve and Uriach) andPCB-based biotech companies (CrystaX and En-antia)—involves the development of new drugsusing state-of-the-art molecular design technolo-gies and high-level technology resources suchas supercomputers and the Vallès (Barcelona)synchrotron. Participants in the project includepublic research centres, the PCB’s Unitat deQuímica Combinatòria, and the Centro Nacionalde Genotipaje attached to the Institut Municipald’Investigacions Mèdiques of Barcelona.

The ONCNOSIS project involves the combineduse of state-of-the-art technologies such as ge-nomics and nanotechnology. Initiated by theGrup Ferrer Internacional, Laboratoris Leti andthe PCB-based biotech companies Oryzon Ge-nomics and Advancell, it is an ambitious pro-gramme for research into early diagnosis mar-kers for several types of cancer. Worth 28 millioneuros, it involves 21 public research centres,among them the PCB Plataforma de Nanotecno-logia, the Institut Català d’Oncologia, the Hospi-tal de la Vall d’Hebron and the Centro Nacional

de Investigaciones Oncológicas, as also themultinational Siemens and another four Spanishbiotech companies.

The NANOFARM project is headed by the Pharma-mar, Rovi and Faes Farma pharmaceutical compa-nies, and also includes the Catalan group LIPOTECand three other companies from this group (BCNPeptides, GP Pharma and Diverdrugs). With a bud-get of 38 million euros, NANOFARM involves thecreation of nanotechnology platforms for drug de-livery systems (DDS), with the ultimate aim beingto improve the therapeutic properties of the activeingredients in drugs. NANOFARM is an integratedmultidisciplinary project that involves more than 25public research institutions, among them, the PCB,IDIBAPS, Fundació Hospital Clínic, the CSIC andthe Miguel Hernández University.

PCB projects and alliances

At the international level, and in accordancewith its priority lines of action, the PCB partici-pates in a number of European projects. As apartner in the Nano2Life project -the first nano-technology research excellence network in Eu-rope, which coordinates 23 European nanobio-


97

A range of PCB-based technology platforms,

mixed units, research groups and businesses

have been involved this year in the imple-

mentation of three projects (Genius Pharma,

ONCNOSIS and NanoFarma) that have re-

ceived subsidies of 50 million euros under

the CENIT programme.

medicine and nanotecnology centres– the PCBaims to implement its strategy of cooperatingwith industry.

It also participates in NATIBS (New Approachesand Tools for Incubated Biotech SMEs) –whoseaim is to encourage the involvement of smalland medium biotech companies in initiativeslaunched under the Sixth Framework Program-me of the European Union– and is a member ofthe board of the European Council of BioRe-gions– which aims to create a platform to promo-te synergies between European bioregions so asto reinforce the European biotechnology sector.

Since 2003, moreover, the PCB has been imple-menting a strategy for the creation of allianceswith similar bodies, with the aims of devising al-ternative forms of cooperation for the develop-ment of new companies, exchanging experienceson the management and development of scienceparks, and coordinating and optimising know-how and technology use. Examples of thesealliances are the agreements signed, respecti-vely, with the Quebec Biotechnology Innovation

Centre, the Heidelberg Technology Park and CICBioGUNE in the Basque Country.


98

Key PCB Data

Surface area: 26,000 m2

(project total: 85,000m2)

Annual budget: 22 M

R+D and Innovation staff: 1,250 / Other staff: 130

ICREA researchers: 12

Ramón y Cajal researchers: 18

Entities in the PCB:

65 public sector research groups

30 companies

21 research support services

Research

Public Bodies

Institut de Recerca Biomèdica (IRB)

Institut de Bioenginyeria de Catalunya (IBEC)

Institut de Biologia Molecular de Barcelona(IBMB-CSIC)

Instituto Nacional de Bioinformática(INB- Genoma España)

Laboratori del Clima

Grup de Recerca de Neurociència Cognitiva

+ 25 UB experimental science, humanities and social science research groups, centres, institutes andobservatories.

Since 2003, the PCB has been implementing a

strategy for the creation of alliances with simi-

lar bodies, with the aims of devising alterna-

tive forms of cooperation for the development

of new companies, exchanging experiences

on the management and development of

science parks, and coordinating and optimi-

sing know-how and technology use.


99

Companies

Advancell In Vitro Technologies

Esteve

Kymos Farma Services

Medichem

Merck Farma y Química

Quimera Ingeniería Biomédica

CrystaX Pharmaceuticals

Enantia

Era Biotech

OED

Oryzon genomics

Applera Hispania

Biolab

Brucker

BTI-Teuto

Diopma

Meta Group Spain

Meteosim

MicroArt

Pharma Mar

Psyncro

Thera

ZBM Patents

Mixed Units

Almirall Prodesfarma - PCB

Lilly - PCB

Pharma Mar - PCB

Associated Entities

Grup Uriach

Prous Science (ICBR)

CataloniaBio

ABG Patentes

Genmedica Therapeutics

Infinitec Activos

Sani-red

Services

Biotechnology Platforms:Combinational Chemistry, Fine Chemistry, Trans-criptomics, Proteomics, Nanotechnology, Automat-ed Crystallography, Experimental Toxicology andEcotoxicology.

UB Science and Technology Services:Quality Guarantee, Genomics, Nuclear MagneticResonance, Transcriptomics, Proteomics, FineChemistry, Peptide Synthesis, Nanometric Tech-niques, Flow Cytometry, Confocal Microscopy andCellular Micromanipulation, Electronic Microscopyand In-Situ Molecular Recognition, SeparativeAnalysis Techniques.

PCB Science Service:Animal Experimentation Service, General ScientificServices, Racioactive Unit, Special Reactions Servi-ce, Transgenesis Unit.

Innovation

CIDEM-PCB BioincubatorAgència de Valorització i Comercialització dels Resul-tats de la Innovació (AVCRI) Centre d’Innovació Fundació Bosch i Gimpera UB Centre de Patents

Other

BioRegió de CatalunyaCataloniaBio

7. Communicating science

Science and technology increasingly affects thedaily lives of people, who, consequently, fre-quently have to make decisions and adopt posi-tions in regard to controversial issues, such as,for example, the use of embryos for research oreven in regard to whether or not to avail of thelatest scientific or technological advances. Thiskind of decision –frequently classified as ethicalin nature– require a profound scientific cultureamong the population so as to foster a positiveattitude to innovation.

As one of its priorities, the PCB aims to contrib-ute to the development of an equitable culturethat generates a positive image for science. Tothis end it undertakes projects to publicise sci-ence, aimed at providing information on ‘livingscience’ undertakings (i.e. research that is beingcarried out in research centres around theworld), with particular reference to research intoareas that may directly affect people, whetherimplemented in the PCB or in other centres.

The PCB Research in Society programme, forexample, organises exhibitions characterised bytheir interactivity and the participation of visitors,and aimed at encouraging public debate on

emerging issues in science. Currently underwayare the exhibitions «Embryos and 21st CenturyMedicine», «What do YOU think?» and «Nano-dialogue», with the last of these held within theframework of a European project for communi-cating the nanotechnologies.

Held annually is the Research Live fair, whichtransmits the characterístic features of the scien-tific method. The fair iconsists of researchers,who reproduce an element of their laboratory ona stand, explaining their research to the publicand the public interacting by experimenting withsome of the instruments used by the research-ers. Research Live, which was held this year forthe fourth time, is very popular with the public ingeneral, but particularly with secondary schoolpupils. Moreover, with soon-to-graduate secon-dary pupils in mind, the Research in Society pro-gramme implements a project (Research in Se-condary Schools) to assist pupils with theirresearch projects and to draw up teaching re-source materials for education centres.

Linked more directly with the research imple-mented in the PCB are the PCB open days. ThePCB also arranges for speakers to meet re-quests from sociocultural and educational bod-ies. Finally, within the framework of the SpendSummer in the Park programme, stays are orga-nised for second-cycle university students withthe aim of making them aware of the world of re-search through participation in projects beingundertaken in the PCB.

8. A second phase of growth ...

The second phase of construction on the60,000m2 remaining to complete the PCB projecthas been undertaken this year. This expansion is


100

In the Research Live fair, which is held an-

nually, the researchers themselves transmit

to the public the characterístic features of the

scientific method.

aimed at both meeting the demand for premisesfrom new research groups, companies and ser-vices, and extending the facilities available toother entities already located within the PCB.

The second phase, which will mean the integra-tion of all the buildings located between the Gre-gorio Marañon, Baldiri Reixac and Josep Sami-tier streets, is anticipated to be operational bythe end of 2008.


101

The second phase of construction on the

60,000 m2

remaining to complete the PCB

project has been undertaken this year and is

aimed at meeting the demand for premises

from new research groups, companies and

services.

CREATING NEW TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE:

ANALYSIS OF A SURVEY OF INVENTORS IN

CATALONIA

Walter García-Fontes*

Using a survey of inventors carried out in 2003, an analysis is made of the characteristics of the persons whohave registered patents in the Catalan science and technology system. The results show that, while the maincharacteristics of inventors and the patents produced are very similar to those in other European countries,various differences stand out: 1) there is a slightly lower proportion of inventors with postgraduate degrees,2) small-scale enterprises are slightly more important, and 3) the universities and public laboratories are lessimportant as sources of knowledge for inventors. An analysis of the determinants of patent value shows thatthe significant factors are the inventor’s age, which may be associated with experience, whether an inventorforms part of more complex systems of knowledge creation or not, and the fact that a patent has been le-gally disputed or not. Further in-depth study of these various factors may serve to define a technology andscience policy to close Catalonia’s technology gap.

Contents

Introduction

Invention and creating technological value

A descriptive analysis of the inventors survey

What determines the value of a patented invention?

Conclusions


102

* Walter García-Fontes is head of the Department of Economics and Business Studies at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, and also of the CREA.

1. Introduction

One good indicator of a country’s technologicalcapacity is the patents that are applied for and re-gistered, in that these are a record of new originalideas that can be applied in production. An analy-sis of the personal characteristics of the inventorswho register these patents, the sources that theyuse to produce new knowledge and to find fun-ding, together with the features of the patentsproduced, may help to understand a country’snational technology potential. There are certainlimitations when using patents this way althoughgiven their potentiality they have been used forquite some time now to describe different econo-mic phenomena.1

Technical and technological knowledge protectedby patents has the character of being a publicgood, in addition to other particular characteris-tics. Arrow2 was one of the first authors to charac-terise knowledge as an economic asset and otherauthors have subsequently extended this con-cept.3 Knowledge does not get depleted when it isshared, and it is very difficult to exclude anyonefrom its use once it is made public. Moreover, theincremental cost of adding more users of a parti-cular piece of knowledge is practically zero, andthe use of knowledge increases its quantity in-stead of diminishing it.

One of the fundamental issues of economic theoryis that competitive markets fail to provide sufficient

incentives for the production of public goods. Thesystem to protect intellectual property and in par-ticular the patent system is one way of mitigatingthis problem of insufficient incentives. There arealso non-market-based mechanisms for recogni-sing producers of results in science and techno-logy, such as for example the assessment ofscientific reputation on the basis of publicationsand awards.

Catalonia is in a favourable situation regarding theproduction of patents with regard to the context inSpain, although in the European context its posi-tion is clearly unfavourable. Table 1 shows thenumber of patent applications to the EuropeanPatent Office per million inhabitants of the workingpopulation during 2002, for Catalonia, for the restof Spain, the average for the EU 15, and for va-rious other European countries and regions thatare comparable to Catalonia. As can be seen, thefigure for patent applications per million inhabi-tants of the working population for Catalonia ismore than twice that for Spain, whereas it is clearlybehind other comparable regions (a ratio of 3 to 1),and very far behind in relation to Finland (6 to 1).

CREATING NEW TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE: ANALYSIS OF A SURVEY OF INVENTORS IN CATALONIA

103

1 GRILLICHES,1990.2 ARROW,1962.3 DASGUPTA and DAVID, 1987.

Knowledge does not get depleted when it is

shared, and it is very difficult to exclude any-

one from its use once it is made public.

An analysis of the process whereby new knowl-edge is created may provide an understanding ofthis situation. This article gives an analysis of thecharacteristics of inventors in Catalonia based on asurvey carried out in 2003 of inventors who had re-gistered patents between 1993 and 1996. The sur-vey was carried out within the framework of the Eu-ropean project, «Patent value in Europe».

Section 2 briefly reviews the invention process.Section 3 gives a descriptive analysis of the sur-vey. Section 4 looks into what determines the val-ue of a patent, and the main conclusions are givenin section 5.

2. Invention and creating technolo-gical value

A patent is a document granted by an authorisedagency that guarantees the ownership (and there-fore the exclusion of any third parties) of an advancegenerated in a technical field. A patent applicationis subjected to a process in which the originality andthe non-obviousness of the invention, in addition to

its potential usefulness, are examined, and patentrights are then awarded to the inventor of the newknowledge. The owner of the patent may ultima-tely be the company or entity where the personregistering the patent works.

The patent document itself contains informationabout the person who has registered the patentand the essential technical features of the inven-tion (knowledge). The information from the surveythat is analysed in this paper identifies the inven-tors and is complemented with information aboutthe patents by way of a series of questions put tothe inventors, which are described in the follow-ing section.

The registering of patents is clearly associatedwith investment in Research, Development andInnovation and is part of a conscious endeavourby the science and technology system to createnew products and production processes. The na-ture of inventions has become less important as anindependent and spontaneous process for gene-rating new knowledge and has come to form partof a process in which investment and the resour-ces allocated to it all play a highly important role.Nevertheless, the knowledge generation processcontinues to be influenced by the endeavours ofindividuals and teams, and an analysis of its fea-tures and the process that leads to new knowl-edge being created may serve to understand theobstacles and challenges confronting a country’snational science and technology system.

In the case of Catalonia in particular, the scienceand technology system is one of the most devel-oped in Spain although it lags behind in various im-portant respects in relation to Europe, as has beenshown in various different studies.4


104

Table 1Patent applications at the European Patent Office permilion inhabitants/working population (2002)

Total number of patent application

Flanders 376.3

Denmark 423.4

Spain 63.3

Catalonia 138.7

Lombardy 345.8

Finland 680.9

East Midlands 231.5

UE 15 average 341.0

Source: CIDEM, 2006.

4 CIDEM, 2006.

An analysis of the survey of inventors is given belowand certain features are identified that give a betterunderstanding of the characteristics of the systemwhereby technological knowledge is created,which may be associated with the obstacles thatare being confronted.

3. A descriptive analysis of theinventors survey

This section gives a comparative analysis of in-ventors in Catalonia, based on a survey carriedout in 2003 of a sample of inventors in six Euro-pean countries. The sample was set up using in-ventors who had registered patents at the Euro-pean Patent Office in the period from 1994-1996.5

The following table gives a summary of the com-plete survey:

This table again shows how the Spanish scienceand technology system lags behind the Europeansystem. It can also be seen from the table that theproduction of patents is clearly lower than expect-ed, given the size of the Spanish economy.

The survey included information on the individualcharacteristics of inventors, the invention process(reasons for patenting, sources of invention), thecost of producing the patent, its use (commerciali-sation, licensing) and also patent value. Out of a to-tal of 256 Spanish inventors included in the survey,104 resided in Catalonia (40.6%).6

One aspect that requires analysis is the genderand age make-up of the human capital involvedin creating new technical knowledge. One exam-ple of this kind of analysis is described byStephan,7 who points out that the composition ofthe human capital involved in the process of gen-erating new technological knowledge may have aclear influence on the system’s capacity. There areimportant asymmetries in distribution according


105

Table 2Features of the survey on «The value of patents in Europe»

France Germany Italy Low Spain United TOTALCountries Kingdom

Total number of patents surveyed (replies) 1,486 3,346 1,250 1,124 256 1,542 9,004

Total number of patents sent 4,199 10,215 1,864 2,594 814 7,846 27,532

Reply rate 35.9% 32.67% 67.06% 44.53% 31.45% 19.70% 32.70%

Total no. of registered patents (1994-1996) 12,386 12,249 4,957 2,831 814 7,846 39,650

Total population, in thousands (1995) 57,844 81,661 56,745 15,459 39,388 58,025

5 The survey was undertaken within the framework of the European project «The value of patents in Europe», within the EU’s Fifth Framework Programmefor Research.6 The survey was carried out by way of e.mail, with telephone back-up. Information on the inventors was also updated to increase the reply rate as muchas possible. Non-replies included inventors who were deceased, who could not be located or who did not wish to participate. 7 STHEFAN, 1996

Out of a total of 256 Spanish inventors includ-

ed in the survey, 104 resided in Catalonia

(40.6%).

to age and gender in practically all countries. Bargraph 1 shows the distribution of inventors accord-

ing to gender, and bar graph 2 distribution accord-ing to age:


106

Graph 2Distribution of inventors according to age (%)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0Catalonia Rest of Spain Other EU countries

36-45

46-55

56-65

Over 65

Younger than 35

Graph 1Distribution of inventors according to gender (%)

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


Male

Female

Source: Bar graph by the author, based on the survey «The value of patents in Europe».

Source: The author, using the survey «The value of patents in Europe».

The distribution according to gender in Catalonia issimilar to that for Spain as a whole, with a slightlyhigher figure for females, although it is non-signifi-cant. There is no important difference for distribu-tion according to age either, with most of the inven-tors being distributed in the 36-65 age group. Thedistribution in Catalonia in this respect is very similarto that for the rest of Europe, with a certain differ-ence in relation to the rest of the Spain, where thereis a slightly higher percentage of young inventors(the 36-45 age group).

One aspect that may act as a brake on new knowl-edge being created is that the higher educationsystem does not meet the needs of the scienceand technology system, and that it does not pro-vide for appropriate undergraduate or postgra-duate training. Bar graph 3 shows the distributionof inventors according to the highest academic levelattained:

The presence of PhD holders who register patentsappears to be less important in Catalonia than therest of Europe. This aspect may indicate some typeof imbalance between postgraduate training andthe needs of private enterprise.

Research is carried out in the various different fieldsof the science and technology system. Bar graph 4shows the distribution of inventors amongst thesedifferent fields:


107

One aspect that may act as a brake on new

knowledge being created is that the higher

education system does not meet the needs of

the science and technology system.

Graph 3Distribution of inventors according to education (%)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5


Higher secondary

Graduate /Master's

PhD

Up to lowersecondary


The distribution in Catalonia and the rest of Spain issimilar, with a slightly higher level of small-scale en-terprises in Catalonia and a slightly lower level in thecase of the universities. In the other Europeancountries, large-scale enterprises played a morepronounced role.

It is interesting to understand the process of how newknowledge is created. The accumulation of knowl-edge is very important in this process, and the trans-fer of knowledge may represent one aspect to be tak-

en into account in this respect. Bar graph 5 describesthe various different sources used to generate knowl-edge. This bar graph provides information on a se-ries of questions put to the inventors about their useof different sources of knowledge. The bar graphgives the percentage of inventors who affirmed theyhad used a specific source of knowledge.

The main source for new knowledge creation, ac-cording to the inventors, is the use of other pat-ents. «Other patents» includes the patent refer-ences and scientific journals used. The otherimportant source is clients and users, togetherwith suppliers and rivals, which have a similar im-portance across the entire sample. On the otherhand, the universities and public laboratories areless important in Catalonia and the rest of Spainthan in other European countries, especially so inthe case of the universities in Catalonia. Spanishinventors underline other sources of knowledge forinventors, and they use much more informal sour-


108

Graph 4Type of institution (%)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


University

Other type of publiccentre

Other

Public research centre

Medium-scaleenterprise

Small-scale enterprise

Hospital, private lab

Large-scale enterprise


As a source for new knowledge creation, the

universities and public laboratories are less

important in Catalonia and the rest of Spain

than in other European countries

ces that do not strictly match the usual actors in ascience and technology system.

Table 3 gives information on the cost of generatinga patent.

As can be seen from the table, the distribution is

highly asymmetric due to the existence of some (afew) very high cost projects. In the other Europeancountries, there were some very large-scale pro-jects. Nevertheless, the cost of the typical project(with an average distribution) is slightly higher forSpanish inventors (including the Catalans).

Where does funding for innovation originate? Thismay come from different sources, from self-finan-cing to public financing to finance from abroad. Bargraph 6 gives information on the financing of pa-tents included in the survey:

It can be seen that self-financing, or funds generat-ed within a company or institution where patents aregenerated, is the main means. For Catalan inven-tors, and especially for those in the rest of Spain,public funding is more important than for those inother European countries, who resort to other pri-vate sources of funding (cooperation with other com-panies and the financial system) and other sources.


109

Graph 5Sources for knowledge creation

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


Suppliers

Rivals

Other sources

Clients and users

Congresses

Scientific journals

Other patents

University

Public labs


Table 3Cost of the invention (thousands of euros)

Catalonia Rest Otherof Spain countries

Minimum 1 1 1

First quartile 20 25 15

Medium 75 76 50

Third quartile 190 300 150

Maximum 3,850 8,000 300,000

Average 237 384 416

Standard dev. 576 1,048 5,213

Source: Table by the author, based on the survey «The value of patents inEurope».

There is a high level of heterogeneity amongst pat-ents in terms of their value, either directly where thecompany uses the patent in new products or pro-duction processes, or indirectly where a patent hasa strategic value for the company in that it preventsother companies from using the technology or ex-panding.

Bar graph 7 shows the answers to a question wherethe inventors were asked to give the value of theirpatents according to a classification of patent valuein the inventor’s sector: amongst the highest 10% interms of value, amongst the 10% and 25% highest,amongst the 25% and 50% highest, or amongst the50% of patents with the lowest values.

As can be seen from the diagram, the distribution ofvalues is more asymmetric for other Europeancountries than for Spanish inventors. Average valuepatents (10-25% in the ranking) are more important

in the rest of Spain than in Catalonia.

Patents can be commercialised directly or a licencegranted to allow another party to use the inventionprotected by the patent. Bar graphs 8 and 9 showthe answers to questions concerning this, with thepercentage of cases where the patent has beencommercialised and licensed. The distribution isvery similar for Catalonia, the rest of Spain and theother European countries studied. The percentageof patents that have been commercialised is slightlyhigher in Catalonia (70% compared to 60%) than inthe rest of Spain and Europe, although 15% of theinventors in Europe considered the possibility ofcommercialising their patents in the future.

It terms of licensing, the distribution is very similaracross the entire sample, and approximately 10%of all patents are licensed. Between 20% and 30%of all patents are never used.


110

Graph 6Financing of inventions

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


Private funding

Financial system

Public funding

Other sources

Self-financing



111

Graph 7Patent value

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5


Highest 10-25%

Highest 25-50%

Lowest 50%

Highest 10%


Graph 8Patent commercialisation

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


No

Under study

Yes


4. What determines the value of apatented invention?

This section goes into more detail regarding therelationship between patent value and the differ-ent factors that may influence this.

Research into the value of patents has been car-ried out for several decades. Empirical evidenceobtained of patent value shows that there is ahighly asymmetric distribution, with some pat-ents attaining a very high value whereas the ma-jority of registered patents have a low or null val-ue. In section 3, it has been shown that, withregard to Catalonia, registered patents are verypositively valued by the inventors who registerthem.

In this section, an appraisal is made of the differ-ent factors that may determine the distribution ofthe value of patents. The methodology used inthis section consisted of using an estimated val-ue for registered patents obtained according tothe procedure proposed by Harhoff, Scherer andVopel.8 The estimated value of a patent was de-rived from the following multi-choice questionthat was put to the inventors: «How high do youthink the minimum price would be for the ownerof the patent to willingly sell the patent rights toan independent buyer the same day that the pa-tent was registered?» The different possible ans-wers provided were: less than 30,000 euros, 30-100,000, 100-300,000, 300,000 to 1 million, 1to 3 million, 3 to 10 million, 10 to 30 million, 30to 100 million, 100 to 300 million, and more than


112

Graph 9Licensing

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10


No

Under study

Yes


8 HARHOFF, SCHERER and VOPEL, 2003.

300 million. Although an exact estimate of the valueof a patent is not obtained this way, the advant-age of offering these possible intervals as ans-wers is that they help to orientate the inventor re-garding his/her estimated value of the patent.The quality of the data obtained by way of thisprocedure was researched and, through the useof various alternative measurement calculations,it was demonstrated that the value of patentsobtained using this direct means does offer a va-lid tool for approximating the economic value ofthe knowledge generated.9

The information obtained in the survey on Spanishinventors is used in this section. Survey question-naires returned with incomplete information on thevariables included in this analysis were discarded,leaving a total of 112 cases, 41 of which were fromCatalan inventors. Some of the variables used inthe previous section were included as determiningfactors, in particular the following:

- Male: fictitious variable that takes a value of 1 ifthe inventor is male, and 0 in the case of a female.

- Licence: fictitious variable that takes a value of1 if the patent has been commercialised or li-censed, and 0 in all other cases.

- Age: the age at which the inventor registered thepatent.

- Age2: the square of the inventor’s age, to takeinto account a non-linear relationship betweenpatent value and the inventor’s age, i.e. if there isan increasing relationship up to a certain age andbeyond which there is a decrease.

- Family: this takes a value of 1 if the patent formspart of a broader family of patents, and 0 if thiswas not the case.

- Public funding: this takes a value of 1 if the re-

search that led to the patent received financefrom public funding, and 0 if this was not the case.

- Litigation: this takes a value of 1 if the patent hadbeen legally disputed, and 0 if this was not thecase.

- Catalonia: this takes a value of 1 if the researchthat led to the patent was carried out in Catalo-nia, and 0 if this was not the case.

The results are given in table 4. An ordinary leastsquares estimate is made, with robust standarderrors to take account of the possibility of hetero-scedasticity. The logarithm of the registered paten-t’s value is used as a dependent variable. The re-gression constant is excluded given that it appearsas being non-significant.

The regression gives a determination coefficient (R2)of 0.77 and a high and clearly significant value for


113

9 GAMBARDELLA, HARHOFF and VERSPAGEN, 2006.

Table 4Dependent variable: logarithm for the patent value(in thousands of euros)

Variable Estimated Standardcoefficient error (robust)

Male -0.56 1.30

Licence 0.68 0.68

Age 0.16** 0.06

Age2 -0.001 0.01

Family 1.17** 0.61

Public funding 0.45 1.03

Litigation 2.73* 1.58

Catalonia 0.03 0.72

Number of observations 112

F-statistic(joint significance) 80.97

R2 0.77

** Significant coefficient at 5% * Significant coefficient at 10%

an F-statistic test of the joint significance of the setof variables included, showing that, all together, thevariables do account for an important proportion ofthe variability of patent value. Only a few variableshowever appear to be significant determinants ofthe registered patents.

Gender appears as being non-significant and ne-gative, i.e. the mean value of registered patents formales is lower than the mean of registered patentsfor females. This result may be associated with thefact that there are few female inventors with regis-tered patents, although it is interesting to observethat the coefficient is negative, which may indicatethat patents registered by women have a relativelyhigh value.

The «licence» variable does not appear as beingsignificant either. In principle, one would expectpatents that have been commercialised or li-censed to have a higher value than the others, al-though this effect does not appear to be verified inthe results given. The value of a patent may be di-rectly associated with commercialisation of thenew knowledge that is produced, either directlyby the owner of the patent or another entity thathas obtained a licence, or a strategic value asso-ciated with the protection of associated productsor markets. The result obtained here may showthat patents in the Spanish technology systemhave more of a strategic value than a direct im-pact on production.

One variable that appears as being significant is age,which may indicate that experience plays an impor-tant role in obtaining patents that have a higher value.This effect would always appear to increase, asthe «age2» variable (the square of the inventor’s age)gives a very low and non-significant coefficient.Bearing in mind that the estimated coefficient isequal to 0.16, and that the dependent variable

measures the logarithm for patent value (originallyin thousands of euros), it can be calculated that, foreach additional year of age of the person registeringthe patent, the average value obtained for the pat-ent increases by 1.17 thousand euros (e0.16= 1.17),which shows that experience appears to accountfor a high value.

Another variable that appears to be significant isthe «family» variable. This variable takes into ac-count whether a patent forms part of a family ofpatents or not, that is, if it forms part of a broaderresearch project that includes different patentsthat protect different parts of a more complexsystem of knowledge. The added value from for-ming part of a family of patents is 3.22 thousandeuros (e1.17).

The type of financing does not appear to affectpatent value. Patents that are the result of publiclyfunded research appear to have a similar value tothose that are self-financed or funded by financialintermediaries.

The «litigation» variable on the other hand gives acoefficient with a high value that is highly significant.This variable takes account of the fact that the pat-ent has been legally disputed, and that anothercompany or entity has considered that the knowl-edge that has been registered infringes a previouspatent or that it does not represent original or non-obvious knowledge. The estimated impact here is15,000 euros (e2.73). Disputed patents representnew technological knowledge which has an impor-tant impact on a particular market or industry thatanother company wishes to protect, and these the-refore quite predictably have a higher value thanother types of patent.

Patents registered in Catalonia show no signifi-cantly different value to Spanish patents as a whole.


114

5. Conclusions

An analysis is made in this article of the characteris-tics of people in Catalonia who specialise in cre-ating new knowledge, and also the factors that de-termine the value of patents that are produced,based on a survey carried out in 2003 on patentsregistered in the period between 1994-1996.

From a general description of the survey analysedin the article, it can be deduced that, while the pro-duction of patents is much less intense in Cataloniaand the rest of Spain than in other European coun-tries, the distribution of the main features of inven-tors and the patents that are produced is very simi-lar to that of other European countries. The maindifferences are as follows:

1. The proportion of inventors with postgraduatedegrees is slightly lower.

2. Small-scale enterprises are slightly more important.3. The universities and public laboratories are less

important as sources of knowledge for inventors.

An analysis of the factors determining patentvalue shows significant factors to be the inven-tor’s age, which may be associated with expe-rience; whether an inventor forms part of morecomplex systems of knowledge creation or not,and the fact that a patent has been legally dis-puted or not.

This analysis may help to establish criteria for im-proving the science and technology system inCatalonia. It suggests in particular that accountmust be taken of whether the higher educationsystem fulfils its role of training, and if access tothe system generates asymmetries in relation toage and gender. In terms of patent value, theanalysis shows that, in spite of the fact that an in-sufficient number of patents is produced, thosethat are have a high value, and that projects withthe potential of generating more than one patentneed to be identified and developed. Further in-depth study of these various factors may serve todefine a technology and science policy that helpsto close Catalonia’s technology gap.


115

References

ARROW, K. J. «Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention». In: The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic andsocial factors. Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 1962, p. 609-25.

CIDEM. «La situació de la innovació a Catalunya», study coordinated by Isabel Busom. Barcelona, 2006.

DASGUPTA, P. and DAVID, P.A. «Information Disclosure and the Economics of Science and Technology». In: GEORGE R. FEIWEL. Arrow and the as-cent of modern economic theory. New York: New York U. Press 1987, p. 519-42.

GAMBARDELL, A.; HARHOFF, D. and VERSPAGEN, B. «The Value of Patents», working paper. University of Bocconi. Italy, 2006

GRILICHES, Z. «Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey», Journal of Economic Literature, 1990, vol. 28, no. 4, p. 1661-1707.

HARHOFF, D.; SCHERER, F.M. and K. VOPEL. «Exploring the Tail of the Patent Value Distribution». In: GRANSTRAND, O. Economics, Law and Inte-llectual Property: Seeking strategies for research and teaching in a developing field. Boston/Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Academic Publisher,2003, p. 279-369.

STEPHAN, P. «The Economics of Science». Journal of Economic Literature, 1996, Vol. 34, no. 3, p. 1199-1235.

re s ú m e n e s e n c a s t e l l a n o

re s u m s e n c a t a l à

CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11 RESÚMENES EN CASTELLANO

118

LA ECOLOGÍA, ¿CIENCIA

ROMÁNTICA?

Josep M. Camarasa

La ecología es una disciplina científica pe-

culiar con unas características que com-

parte con muy pocas otras (ciencia de sín-

tesis, multiplicidad de raíces, enfoques

holísticos, etc.). A partir de estas caracte-

rísticas y de la historia de la disciplina se

concluye que la ecología es una ciencia

profundamente marcada por el pensa-

miento romántico de finales del siglo xVIII y

las primeras décadas del xIX y que ha teni-

do sus períodos más brillantes en los suce-

sivos momentos históricos de resurgimien-

to de este pensamiento, entendido como

crítica del modelo contemporáneo de civili-

zación desde dentro de esta civilización,

como autocrítica de la modernidad.

PARQUES CIENTÍFICOS Y

TECNOLÓGICOS Y

UNIVERSIDADES EN EL SISTEMA

DE INCUBACIÓN DE EMPRESAS

DE BASE TECNOLÓGICA:

CONTRIBUCIÓN DESDE EL

MODELO DE LA TRIPLE HÉLICE

Josep M. Piqué, Sònia González,

Joan Bellavista, y Víctor Alves

El objetivo de este artículo es analizar el

papel de los parques científicos y tecno-

lógicos y de las universidades en el siste-

ma de incubación de empresas de base

tecnológica dentro del sistema de inno-

vación regional. El análisis se realiza a

partir de la realidad emprendedora del

territorio de Cataluña durante el período

2001-2003, y pretende contribuir, desde

el modelo de la triple hélice, a un modelo

que permita analizar el sistema de incu-

bación de empresas de base tecnológica

en Cataluña.

CIRIT. 25 AÑOS


El pasado mes de noviembre se cumplie-

ron 25 años de la creación de la Comisión

Interdepartamental de Investigación e In-

novación Tecnológica (CIRIT), actual Con-

sejo Interdepartamental de Investigación e

Innovación Tecnológica. A pesar de las difi-

cultades que ha habido en este período de

nuestra historia, y en concreto en el campo

de la investigación y la innovación, la/el CI-

RIT ha manifestado su voluntad infrangible

y decidida de conducir un proyecto de fu-

turo para Cataluña en este campo que, si

era necesario en el momento de su crea-

ción, es tan o más vigente en la actualidad,

aunque por razones distintas.

En este artículo se realiza una aproxima-

ción a los hechos más destacados de la

evolución de esta institución y se aportan

algunos de los datos más significativos de

esta evolución.

En el primer capítulo titulado «Primeros pa-

sos» se hace referencia a la constitución de

esta institución, el contexto social, las per-

sonalidades implicadas, los instrumentos

organizativos, los objetivos planteados, así

como las primeras actuaciones. A conti-

nuación, en el capítulo «Hechos destaca-

dos» se han puesto de relieve los aconteci-

mientos que incidieron de forma importante

en la evolución de esta institución. En los

capítulos «Nuevo impulso» y «Planes Cua-

drienales» se exponen los hechos más rele-

vantes de la actividad desarrollada en dos

etapas diferenciadas con la inclusión de da-

tos y actuaciones significativas.

119

PARQUE DE INVESTIGACIÓN

BIOMÉDICA DE BARCELONA

(PRBB)

Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert y Teresa

Badia

La inauguración del Parque de Investiga-

ción Biomédica de Barcelona (Parc de

Recerca Biomèdica de Barcelona, PRBB),

el pasado mes de mayo, culmina cinco

años de edificación y un período de unos

veinte años trabajando para construir una

infraestructura científica capaz de com-

petir con los mejores centros europeos.

En este sentido, el PRBB es un campus

de producción intensiva de conocimiento

en el ámbito de la biomedicina y de las

ciencias de la salud, que destaca por su

masa crítica, por su personal investigador

de alto nivel y también por su carácter in-

ternacional.

EL PARQUE CIENTÍFICO DE

BARCELONA (PCB), LA

INVESTIGACIÓN Y LA

INNOVACIÓN ENTRE LA

UNIVERSIDAD Y LA EMPRESA

Susana Herráiz, Rosina Malagrida, y

Fernando Albericio

El Parque Científico de Barcelona, creado

por la Universidad de Barcelona, con el

apoyo de la Fundación Bosch i Gimpera y

Caixa Catalunya, concentra en un solo es-

pacio físico grupos que lideran la investi-

gación en las entidades públicas, junto

con empresas que apuestan por la inno-

vación y las infraestructuras científico tec-

nológicas potentes. Este año, se inicia la

ampliación de este espacio para conti-

nuar impulsando la investigación interdis-

ciplinaria y de excelencia en áreas de la

biomedicina y la biotecnología, y también

en otras relacionadas con las ciencias ex-

perimentales, humanas y sociales; y esta-

bleciendo nuevas fórmulas que faciliten

que el conocimiento generado en su en-

torno llegue al conjunto de la sociedad

mediante, por ejemplo, la creación de em-

presas o de tecnologías concretas que

contribuyan a mejorar la calidad de vida

de la población.

LA CREACIÓN DE NUEVO CONO-

CIMIENTO TECNOLÓGICO: ANÁ-

LISIS DE UNA ENCUESTA DE IN-

VENTORES EN CATALUÑA


Mediante el análisis de una encuesta de

inventores realizada el año 2003, se estu-

dian las características de las personas

que han registrado patentes en el sistema

de ciencia y tecnología catalán. Los prin-

cipales resultados muestran que, aunque

las características principales de los in-

ventores y las inventoras y de las patentes

producidas se parecen bastante a las del

resto de países europeos, se pueden des-

tacar algunas diferencias: 1) una propor-

ción un poco más reducida de inventores

con postgrados, 2) un peso ligeramente

mayor de les pequeñas empresas y 3) un

peso menor de las universidades y los la-

boratorios públicos como fuentes de co-

nocimiento para los inventores. Por últi-

mo, un análisis de los determinantes del

valor de las patentes muestra que salen

como a factores significativos la edad de

los inventores, que puede estar asociada

con la experiencia, el hecho de pertene-

cer a sistemas de creación de conoci-

miento más complejos y si la patente fue

cuestionada legalmente. Una exploración

más a fondo de estos diversos factores

puede ayudar a diseñar una política tec-

nológica y científica que ayude a reducir el

déficit tecnológico de Cataluña.

CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11 RESUMS EN CATALÀ

120

L'ECOLOGIA, CIÈNCIA

ROMÀNTICA?

Josep M. Camarasa

L'ecologia és una disciplina científicapeculiar amb unes característiques quecomparteix amb molt poques altres (cièn-cia de síntesi, multiplicitat d'arrels, enfo-caments holístics, etc.). A partir d'aques-tes característiques i de la història de ladisciplina mateixa es conclou que l'ecolo-gia és una ciència profundament marcadapel pensament romàntic dels anys finalsdel segle XVIII i les primeres dècades delXIX i que ha tingut els seus períodes mésbrillants en els successius moments his-tòrics de revifalla d'aquest pensament,entès en el sentit de crítica del modelcontemporani de civilització des de dinsmateix d'aquesta civilització, d'autocríti-ca de la modernitat.

PARCS CIENTÍFICS I

TECNOLÒGICS I UNIVERSITATS EN

EL SISTEMA D'INCUBACIÓ

D'EMPRESES DE BASE

TECNOLÒGICA: CONTRIBUCIÓ

DES DEL MODEL DE LA TRIPLE

HÈLIX

Josep M. Piqué, Sònia González, Joan

Bellavista i Víctor Alves

L'objectiu d'aquest article és analitzar elpaper dels parcs científics i tecnològics ide les universitats en el sistema d'incuba-ció d'empreses de base tecnològica dinsdel sistema d'innovació regional. L'anàlisies realitza a partir de la realitat emprene-dora del territori de Catalunya durant elperíode 2001-2003, i pretén contribuir,des del model de la triple hèlix, a un modelque permeti analitzar el sistema d'incuba-ció d'empreses de base tecnològica aCatalunya.

CIRIT. 25 ANYS


El passat mes de novembre es van complirvint-i-cinc anys de la creació de la Comis-sió Interdepartamental de Recerca i Inno-vació Tecnològica (CIRIT), actual ConsellInterdepartamental de Recerca i InnovacióTecnològica. Tot i els entrebancs que hansucceït en aquest període de la nostra his-tòria, i en concret en el camp de la recerca,i la innovació, la/el CIRIT ha manifestat laseva voluntat infrangible i decidida de con-duir un projecte de futur per a Catalunya enaquest camp que, si calia en el moment dela seva creació, és tant o més vigent enl’actualitat, encara que per raons diferents.

En aquest article es fa una aproximació alsfets més destacats de l’evolució d’aques-ta institució i s’aporten algunes de les da-des més significatives d’aquesta evolució.

En el primer capítol, titulat «Primers pas-sos», es fa referència a la constituciód’aquesta institució, al context social, ales personalitats implicades, els instru-ments organitzatius, als objectius plante-jats, a les primeres actuacions. A conti-nuació, en el capítol Fets destacats, s’hanposat en relleu els esdeveniments que vanincidir de manera important en l’evoluciód’aquesta institució. En els capítols «Nouimpuls» i «Plans de recerca quadriennals»es recullen els trets més rellevants del’activitat que s’ha dut a terme en duesetapes diferenciades, amb la inclusió dedades i actuacions significatives.

121

PARC DE RECERCA BIOMÈDICA

DE BARCELONA (PRBB)

Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert i Teresa

Badia

La inauguració del Parc de Recerca Bio-mèdica de Barcelona (PRBB) el proppas-sat mes de maig, posa fi a cinc anys deconstrucció i a un període d’uns vintanys treballant per bastir una infraestruc-tura científica capaç de competir ambels millors centres europeus. En aquestsentit, el PRBB és un campus de pro-ducció intensiva de coneixement enl’àmbit de la biomedicina i de les ciènciesde la salut, que destaca per la seva mas-sa crítica, pel seu personal investigadord’alt nivell i també pel seu caràcter inter-nacional.

EL PARC CIENTÍFIC DE

BARCELONA (PCB), LA RECERCA I

LA INNOVACIÓ ENTRE LA

UNIVERSITAT I L’EMPRESA

Susana Herráiz, Rosina Malagrida,

Fernando Albericio

El Parc Científic de Barcelona, creat per laUniversitat de Barcelona, amb el suportde la Fundació Bosch i Gimpera i la CaixaCatalunya, concentra en un sol espai físicgrups capdavanters de recerca d’entitatspúbliques, amb empreses que apostenper la innovació i amb infraestructurescientificotecnològiques potents. Enguany,s’inicia l’ampliació d’aquest espai percontinuar impulsant la recerca interdisci-plinària i d’excel·lència en àrees de la bio-medicina i la biotecnologia, i també en al-tres de relacionades amb les ciènciesexperimentals, humanes i socials; i esta-blint noves fórmules que facilitin que el co-neixement generat en el seu entorn arribial conjunt de la societat mitjançant, perexemple, la creació d’empreses o de tec-nologies concretes que contribueixin amillorar la qualitat de vida de la població.

LA CREACIÓ DE CONEIXEMENT

TECNOLÒGIC NOU: ANÀLISI

D’UNA ENQUESTA D’INVENTORS

A CATALUNYA


Mitjançant l’anàlisi d’una enquesta d’in-ventors realitzada l’any 2003, s’estudienles característiques de les persones quehan registrat patents al sistema de ciènciai tecnologia català. Els principals resultatsmostren que tot i que les principals carac-terístiques dels inventors i inventores i deles patents produïdes s’assemblen forçaa la resta de països europeus, es podendestacar algunes diferències: 1) una pro-porció una mica més reduïda d’inventorsamb postgraus, 2) un pes lleument mésgran de les petites empreses i 3) un pesmés reduït de les universitats i els labora-toris públics com a fonts de coneixementper als inventors. Finalment, una anàlisidels determinants del valor de les patentsmostra que surten com a factors significa-tius l’edat dels inventors, cosa que pot es-tar associada amb l’experiència, el fet deformar part de sistemes de creació de co-neixement més complexos i si la patent vaestar qüestionada legalment. Una explo-ració més a fons d’aquests diversos fac-tors pot ajudar a dissenyar una políticatecnològica i científica que ajudi a reduir eldèficit tecnològic de Catalunya.

CONEIXEMENT I.

SOCIETATK n o w l e d g e a n d S o c i e t y . J o u r n a l o f U n i v e r s i t i e s , R e s e a r c h a n d t h e I n f o r m a t i o n S o c i e t y .

N u m b e r 1 1 . M a y - A u g u s t 2 0 0 6

ISSN (english e-version): 1696-8212ISSN (catalan printed version): 1696-7380ISSN (catalan e-version): 1696-8212Legal deposit (english e-version): B-38745-2004Legal deposit (catalan printed version): B-27002-2003Legal deposit (catalan e-version): B-26720-2005

Chief editorJosep M. Camarasa i Castillo

CoordinatorBlanca Ciurana i Llevadot

Editorial boardJoan Bravo i Pijoan, Joan Cadefau i Surroca, Jacqueline Glarner, Xavier Lasauca i Cisa, Esther Pallarolsi Llinàs, Emilià Pola i Robles, Alba Puigdomènech Cantó, Josep Ribas i Seix, Jordi Sort i Miret, IgnasiVendrell i Aragonès, Josep M. Vilalta i Verdú, Fina Villar i López

Coordinating editor and productionGlòria Vergés i Ramon

DesignQuin Team!

LayoutInom,sa

English translationGerardo Denis Brons, Alan Lounds Jones, Carl MacGabhann, Ailish M. J. Maher, Charles Southgate andTobias Willett

The contents of the articles and notes are the sole responsability of the authors. CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETATdoes not necessarily identify with the author Reproduction of articles and notes is allowed, provided that theoriginal author and source are specified.

Subscription to the printed Catalan version of CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT is free. It can be obtained from:Departament d’Educació i UniversitatsGerència de Serveis Comuns de l’àmbit d’Universitats i RecercaGabinet TècnicVia Laietana, 33, 6è08003 Barcelonatel. (00 34) 935 526 700Fax. (00 34) 935 526 701e-mail: [email protected]

Also available on-line in Catalan on the DEiU web site:www.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/coneixementisocietatwww.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/knowledgeandsociety


11CONEIXEMENT I SOCIETAT 11Knowledge and Society

SUMMARY

ARTICLES

Ecology, a romantic science? 06

Josep M. Camarasa

Science and technology parks and universities in the technology business incubator system:a contribution based on the triple helix model 32

Josep M. Piqué, Sònia González, Joan Bellavista and Victor Alves

Cirit. 25 Years 48


NOTES

The Barcelona Biomedical Research Park (PRBB) 82

Jordi Camí, Reimund Fickert and Teresa Badia

Barcelona Science Park (PCB):research and innovation exchange between universities and the private sector 90

Susana Herráiz, Rosina Malagrida and Fernando Albericio

Creating new technological knowledge: Analysis of a survey of inventors in Catalonia 102


RESÚMENES EN CASTELLANO / RESUMS EN CATALÀ 117

11

CO

NE

IXE

ME

NT I

SO

CIE

TA

T

Ecology, a romantic science? Science and technology parks and universities in the technology business

incubator system: a contribution based on the triple helix model CIRIT. 25 Years The Barcelona Biomedical

Research Park (PRBB) Barcelona Science Park (PCB): research and innovation exchange between universities

and the private sector Creating new technological knowledge: analysis of a survey of inventors in Catalonia.



N u m b e r 1 0 . J a n u a r y - A p r i l 2 0 0 6 .

http:// www.gencat.cat/universitatsirecerca/coneixementisocietat


Coneixement i societat núm. 11. May - RACO.cat

Documents

Transcript of Coneixement i societat núm. 11. May - RACO.cat