111 responses concerning bill on abolition of The Danish Board of Technology
Most of the 111 responses on the settlement act find The Danish Board of Technology relevant, necessary, a role model and economic sense for the society.The Minister for Science, Innovation and Higher Education has on February 1st 2012 sent following to The Parliament Committee (FIV).
- a commented response overview to bill nr. L 79 on abolition of The Danish Board of Technology
- the responses in a PDF document (In danish)
- a categorized overview on the responses in a PDF document (In danish)
The Ministry has categorized the critical responses to the abolition of The Danish Board of Technology in seven categories. Following are extracts from the categories and another category “other responses” including answers “nothing to report”.
1 The Danish Board of Technology’s special competences
DBT holds a special professionalism and expertise that has been built over the past 25 years which should not be lost.
2 International evaluation
A large number of proposals proposing that an international evaluation should be conducted before making a final decision on closing the Board.
The majority of the responses affects the economic reasoning behind the saving of 10 million. annually.
4 International role model
A large number of responses, especially the foreign, emphasizes that the DBT is an internationally recognized role model for how to handle citizen involvement in technology and research debate.
5 Democracy-building and research providing
About half of the consultation responses indicates the DBT’s ability to be democracy-building through the Board’s work to implement citizen summits and consensus conferences.
6 independent and impartial partner
A large part of the responses points out that DBT’s construction ensures that the Danish society has an independent and impartial 'voice' in an area which is characterized by an increasingly complex and fragmented debate.
7 Task Responsiblity forward
A number of the responses urges the existing skills in the DBT should be ensured so that the knowledge and expertise built up over the past 25 years, does not spread and thereby get lost.
There is a response from CO industry which has expressed a positive view of the proposal to abolish the Danish Board of Technology, as the money be transferred to research.
One response has been critical to the designating mechanisms, which is proposed revised.
Overall comments on the responses
The minister informs that DBT's special professional skills and competencies in its territory are indisputably. There is also no doubt that the DBT for the foreign response partners have been a role model because of its handling of citizen involvement in technology and research debate - also because TR has been a pioneer in the field.
The decision on withdrawal of the grant for DBT and DBT’s abandonment is not taken because DBT’s work is questioned or criticized, but due to the agreement of November 15th 2011 between the government, Venstre, Dansk Folkeparti, Enhedslisten, Liberal Alliance and the Konservative on distribution of the research reserve in 2012. The decision is justified by a desire for a re-prioritization of the resources and is therefore primarily a result of political economic priorities. Additionally, there is a desire to layoff the area that the DBT until now has handled.
The Minister said regarding the argument of the economic reasoning behind the saving of 10 million. annually, that it is true that DBT takes home EU funds to partially finance its projects, but this external funding is not alone sufficient to cover operation, because the EU typically requires some co-financing. The bill relieve area as mentioned above, ie. allowing the possibility that others, including private operators will be able to continue the activities that DBT has so far done – and thereby bring home EU funds in similar manner.
The Minister also informs that the DBT's skills, etc. does not necessarily get lost due to DBT's abolition, but that they can be passed on in other register. In the desired change in priorities of resources and freeing of the area, as TR previously carried out, is also an opportunity to let the relevant skills continue if they are in demand.
Lastly, the Minister stated that an implementation of an (international) evaluation of TR does not provide more resources for research (as well as an evaluation can not lead to a change of priorities in the allocation of research reserve).
Last update: 07-02-2012