Economic success is all about research and development (R&D). Or is it?

Figures from the OECD caused a stir this week with the news that China has overtaken Japan to become the second biggest R&D investor in the world, after the US.

And last week the European Parliament signed off a £36bn Framework Programme (FP7) - including a £6bn tranche for technology research - aimed at helping Europe meet its i2010 target to become the world's most competitive knowledge economy.

Such lavish commitments are welcome in that they show a Commission willing to put its money where its mouth is. And, more positive still, the decisions on which projects qualify for investment are to be made by experts rather than politicians or bureaucrats.

But massive central funding is not enough - either to encourage pioneering research or to ensure its wider economic impact. And in some ways, massive investment can be a smokescreen for governments hoping to avoid more complex policy decisions.

How far R&D actually translates into economic growth is, in itself, in question. A recent survey of the world's 1000 largest R&D spenders, by Booz Allen Hamilton, concluded there is no statistical relationship between R&D investment levels and improved profits. As for an individual corporation, most likely for a national economy.

And even if such a relationship could be proved, R&D is only one link in a long chain including policy nightmares as diverse as regulatory and tax environments, skills issues, even apparently oblique topics such as environmental and transport strategies.

Clearly £36bn for research is not a bad thing. But there are more complex questions still to tackle in the name of Europe's knowledge economy, and just throwing money at the problem should fool no one.