Research policy: Militarization as a driver of innovation in research

Innovations mean changes and are a farewell to the existing. But this is not always the intention, as the Expert Commission for Research and Innovation (EFI) has learned repeatedly in its 16 years of work on behalf of the federal government. The proposal for innovations must also come at the right time, as can be seen from the example of the annual report handed over to Chancellor Scholz last week. While the experts’ vote to abolish the strict separation of civil and military research in Germany was still a “slow seller” last year, the worsening global security situation is now leading to the opposite reaction: “A turning point in research,” is the headline in the ” FAZ«.

The Research and Innovation Expert Commission was founded in 2008 and has been providing scientific policy advice to the federal government ever since. The most important product is an annual report on research, innovation and technological performance in Germany. In accordance with its mandate, EFI analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the German innovation system in an international and temporal comparison and evaluates the prospects of Germany as a research and innovation location. The proposals are met with increased response in administration and politics. Members of the expert commission are the professors of economics Irene Bertschek (ZEW – Leibniz Center for European Economic Research GmbH Mannheim), Guido Bünstorf (University of Kassel), Uwe Cantner (University of Jena), Carolin Häussler (University of Passau), Till Requate (University Kiel) and Friederike Welter (Institute for SME Research Bonn).

Artificial intelligence needs to catch up

The main topics of the 188-page expertise this year are artificial intelligence, technologies for sustainable agriculture, social innovations, which are seen as an essential element in overcoming social challenges, and international mobility in the science and innovation system. In the political introductory section, current topics in research policy are addressed, such as the progress of the “Future Research and Innovation Strategy”, which should be “vigorously pursued” with its mission approach, or the founding of the German Agency for Transfer and Innovation (DATI).

A main focus is on artificial intelligence (AI). The EFI Commission states that Germany “urgently needs to catch up” when it comes to their use. The judgment is based on the international comparison of scientific AI publications and AI patents carried out by commission member Carolin Häussler from the University of Passau. Their finding: “China and the USA dominate technology development in the field of AI, while Germany and the EU are falling behind.” “Germany and the EU are not leaders” in the development of large language models and multimodal models, both of which serve as basic models for a variety of AI applications. In this situation, technological sovereignty would also be at risk. “Technological sovereignty in the field of AI requires that Germany, together with the EU, can maintain and further develop AI technologies itself,” explains Häussler. If this is missing, one-sided dependencies on other economic areas will grow, whether America or the Far East.

Role models USA and Israel

Artificial intelligence is currently the most prominent example of a “dual use” technology that can be used in two ways, both in the civilian sector and for military purposes. “The importance of dual use has increased significantly in recent years – also as a result of the wide range of applications of digital technologies,” states the EFI Commission.

Because the contact between the two worlds can contribute to increased performance and efficiency in both the military and civilian sectors, “dual use” is actively promoted by governments in many countries. DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) in the USA – with an annual budget of 4.1 billion US dollars – and “Military Unit 8200” in Israel are mentioned as examples of funding organizations. Although both facilities are part of the military complex, there is an overflow into the civilian sector at different times. In Israel, this happens by allowing IT specialists to later use the skills they acquired in the military – such as code decryption and cyber warfare – in civilian IT start-ups.

The Commission also believes that cooperation between military and civilian research and development (R&D) makes sense from an economic perspective. The EFI study cites a US long-term study that “one dollar of government-funded military R&D stimulates between $0.57 and $0.72 in additional private R&D spending.” A similar effect can also be demonstrated for employment.

So far, there has been no willingness to change this in the German university landscape, in which many universities have used “civil clauses” to exclude the conduct of military research. However, the interested reception of the EFI proposals in the political sphere suggests that a ball has started rolling here. “It is time to question and reassess the strict separation between civil and military research in Germany,” explained Federal Research Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger.

The EFI report also takes up a previously marginal topic in research policy, “social innovations”. This refers to forms of organization “that contribute to solving social or economic problems and thus create added value for society,” says the EFI report in somewhat bony professorial German. The examples given are more concrete, such as multi-generational houses and citizen energy cooperatives, online networking platforms or the collective financing formats of the “crowd economy”. Among other things, the experts are calling for the statistical facts to be improved.

Precision technologies instead of chemistry

The chapter on innovation opportunities in the agricultural sector identifies the challenges that need to be solved using modern technology: global population growth, adaptation to climate change, the decline of agricultural land as well as biodiversity loss and groundwater pollution caused by agriculture itself. “In the future, agriculture will have to produce larger quantities of food using less environmentally harmful inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers,” emphasizes economics professor Till Requate from the University of Kiel, lead author.

The use of precision technologies and “smart farming” through farm management systems or digitally supported agricultural machinery as well as green genetic engineering products are no longer new as such. “However, there are still hurdles in the way of widespread use of such technologies,” the report states. These include the high acquisition costs for precision technologies, but also failures in the overall ecological accounting. It is stated that the use of plant protection products and fertilizers can only be comparatively cheap because the negative environmental effects are not sufficiently taken into account. “In order for new, environmentally friendly precision technologies to be used more widely, a levy on crop protection products and fertilizers is required,” demands Uwe Cantner from the University of Jena, chairman of the expert commission.

Barriers to green genetic engineering

Progress in plant breeding is stalling because of the political fight over green genetic engineering. Genome editing offers new possibilities. “In Germany and the EU, however, the potential remains unused due to an outdated and inconsistent legal framework that is not scientifically based,” explains Irene Bertschek from the Mannheim Center for European Economic Research (ZEW).

From the EFI Commission’s perspective, this legal framework not only restricts research in the biotechnology sector, but also the competitiveness of agricultural production in the EU. “For this reason, the currently valid legal framework must be revised and regulation independent of the breeding process established, since no risks inherent in the process can be identified,” emphasizes Commission Chairman Cantner.

“Another major obstacle to the use of green genetic engineering is the low level of acceptance among the population, which therefore needs to be scientifically informed about green genetic engineering,” adds Till Requate. Such a communications strategy from the federal government should also be reflected in “consistent legislation,” he recommends. The next small research policy “turning point” that is imminent in Germany.