The European Academies Science Advisory Council is trying to raise the voice of researchers in EU policy. Laura Greenhalgh visited its Brussels office to find out more.
It is no secret that mixing science and politics can be a tricky business. The sterile environment of most scientific laboratories is a far cry from the messy reality of the political scene. Furthermore, it is an environment that few EU politicians have experienced. Yet decisions that rely on an understanding of technologies or scientific concepts are made every week in Brussels.
This is where the European Academies Science Advisory Council believes it has an important role to play. “Often we feel that the policymakers just aren’t aware of the science, or they have people presenting science to them but if you look into it, it is not independent science,” explains Sofie Vanthournout, head of Easac’s Brussels office at the Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium. “We create short, technical reports that are overviews of current knowledge.”
Founded 12 years ago by the national science academies of the member states, Easac sees itself as the collective voice of science in Europe, providing assistance beyond that of the individual national academies. “If European policymakers get advice from the Royal Society, for instance, it has its value, but it’s British advice; it’s British scientists,” says Vanthournout. “It’s very valuable for [them] to receive advice they know is supported by all the member countries.”
With a remit to assess any topic within energy, the environment and biosciences, Easac certainly doesn’t shy away from tackling controversial issues. Previous reports have looked at the impact of nanomaterials, investigated Europe’s potential in synthetic biology and discussed internet-based predictive genetic testing for disease. An upcoming report, entitled Planting the Future, will cover genetically modified crops and the sustainable development of agriculture.
Combining reports with plans for regulatory change is a task for Easac’s steering panels, who select the topics after input from national academies and policymakers. The reports are compiled by experts from the national academies, using an open call to gain input from industry.
“It’s not because a scientist says this is something we need to do, but because the EU wants to hear it,” says Vanthournout. “Some topics we won’t do because they just produced new legislation.”
Despite all this hard work, there is still a risk the reports will simply end up on a policymaker’s shelf—an effect Vanthournout has been working hard to avoid. In 2010, Easac opened its Brussels base, complementing the official secretariat at Germany’s Leopoldina national academy, to help increase its presence in the EU capital.
“We try to give the reports more visibility through launch events. But often it’s just a matter of getting into their offices and putting it in front of their noses,” Vanthournout says.
Vanthournout believes that Easac is already seeing some success: “As soon as I can tell our story to someone, they are convinced.” Support has been especially strong from the Commission, including a declaration of intent with the EU Joint Research Centre and recognition from Anne Glover, the chief scientific adviser to Commission president José Manuel Barroso. “Glover is so enthusiastic that she or her direct assistant comes to every council meeting,” says Vanthournout.
Part of this impact may be because Easac does not confine itself to presenting scientific facts, but also takes steps to convert these into a policy recommendation. “MEPs are not always interested in the data behind recommendations, as long as they know it is based on evidence,” says Vanthournout.
Some would argue that such value assessments should be left to the political arena—but Easac maintains that its advice remains free of outside influences, including commercial and political bias.
The organisation is funded by contributions from the national academies and some support from the global network of science academies, IAP. “We’re looking into funding possibilities from the Commission and the European Parliament, although we’re very careful on that because we definitely want to remain independent,” says Vanthournout.
At the moment, Easac’s experts provide their time for free—a policy Vanthournout says they intend to keep even if funding from the Commission and Parliament becomes available, to ensure researchers work for academic rather than financial reasons.
In times of tight public spending, Easac’s task will be to balance its independence with a need for more resources. “As our visibility increases, we get requests for more work, and we just can’t do it right now,” says Vanthournout. “That’s the challenge we face in the coming years: to live up to the increasing demands.”
Something to add? Email comment@ResearchResearch.com