Call on European Commission to Support Independent Scienc

[Guest guest]

1 Apr 2005 19:25:20 -0000

 

Call on European Commission to Support Independent

press-release Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book

 

 

The Institute of Science in Society Science Society

Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

========================================================

 

 

ISIS Press Release 01/04/05

 

 

Call on European Commission to Support Independent Science

**********************************************

 

Dozens of prominent scientists from all over the world are

calling on the European Commission to support independent

science in its next round of science funding, and to ensure

maximum transparency and democratic input in deciding

funding and research priorities.

 

The scientists want Europe's next round of public ressearch

funding - Framework Programme 7 (2007 to 2013) - to

establish broad funding criteria that put public interest

ahead of 'wealth creation', and to include ethical and

safety considerations before the research is funded. They

are demanding a redistribution of the research budget away

from industry and technology driven areas like genomics and

information technologies towards sustainable agriculture,

ecology and energy use in sustainable systems, and holistic

health. In particular, they would like to see top priority

given to scientists working with local communities to

revitalize and protect traditional agricultural and

healthcare systems.

 

The detailed Comment follows. Please add your name and/or

your organisation to endorse the comment here.

http://www.indsp.org/endorsements/endorsementISP-FP7.php

 

 

 

__________

 

 

 

Independent Science Panel

 

The Overriding Need for Independent Science

 

Comment to European Commission on Framework Programme 7

 

The Independent Science Panel (ISP), launched 10 May 2003 at

a public conference in London, UK, consists of dozens of

prominent scientists from all over the world, spanning the

disciplines of agroecology, agronomy, biomathematics,

botany, chemical medicine, ecology, epidemiology,

histopathology, microbial ecology, molecular genetics,

nutritional biochemistry, physiology, plant biotechnology,

taxonomy, toxicology and virology

(http://www.indsp.org/ISPMembers.php).

 

They share a deep concern over the commercialisation of

genetic modification (GM) and other technologies without the

due process of thorough scientific assessment, informed

public consultation and public consent; and are dedicated to

researching and actively promoting science for a sustainable

world through education, advocacy and social engagement.

 

The overriding need for independent science

 

Science has been playing an increasingly major role in

national and international policy decisions that affect not

only our everyday lives but also the very survival of our

planet. Unfortunately, science has also become more and more

closely tied to industrial interests that all too often

conflict with public good and public safety.

 

Science wars are being fought at national and international

forums over global warming, nuclear wastes, industrial

pollution, and GM crops in the name of `national

competitiveness', `national security', `free trade' and

`feeding the world'.

 

There has never been a greater need to re-establish

independent, disinterested science that can both protect the

public from the negative impacts of emerging technologies

and genuinely deliver a safe, secure, equitable and

sustainable world. This presents the European Union (EU)

Framework 7 programme for funding scientific research with

challenges and opportunities in equal measure.

 

The ISP propose the following measures for the EU Framework

7 funding programme to go some way towards meeting the

challenges and opportunities.

 

1. Establishing broad funding criteria that put public

interest ahead of `wealth creation'

 

The following explicit criteria should be used both in

setting priorities for areas of research, and in funding

specific programmes and projects: Does it contribute to

public good? Is it ethical? Is it safe? Will it contribute

to furthering fundamental understanding of nature?

 

All too often, questions on safety, in particular, are being

raised after the research has been done, and worse, after

the technology has been commercialised. At that stage, it is

very difficult to reach a consensus on account of the large

amount of investment at stake. Recent cases in point include

the safety of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones

and masts, and the safety of GM crops.

 

2. Ensuring the greatest transparency, independence and

public participation in deciding research priorities

 

Committees deciding funding priorities and areas must

include representatives of appropriate public interest

organisations.

 

No member of any committee making decisions on funding

priorities and areas should have, or should recently have

had, a financial interest in the outcome of the decision

being made.

 

More than that, the membership of such committees must

include scientists with relevant expertise who are not

involved directly or indirectly in the research area to be

funded.

 

3. Ensuring the greatest transparency and independence in

deciding research funding

 

No member of any committee making funding decisions on

specific projects should have current or recent-past

financial or commercial link with an industry involved in

the proposal under consideration.

 

4. Ensuring support for independent science and scientists

 

The increasing tendency to fund big research programmes in

big established research groups has served to reinforce

entrenched scientific opinions that are often not in the

public interest. This has resulted in the wrong decisions

being made, excessive delays in applying appropriate

regulatory or remedial measures, and the lack of precaution,

all of which have cost the taxpayer hundreds of billions in

compensation for damages to health and the environment. The

cases that have been resolved against the entrenched

scientific opinions include asbestos, thalidomide, cigarette

smoking, BSE and foot-and-mouth disease.

 

These entrenched opinions have colonized our academic

institutions, where they are ruthlessly deployed to

persecute independent scientists who try to report their

research results honestly or to tell the public what they

know. This not only intimidates staff and students, it is

stultifying innovation and obstructing real progress in

understanding nature, resulting in a deterioration of

science education at all levels. It has also contributed to

a growing, pervasive mistrust of science and scientists

across the globe.

 

To protect the integrity of science and scientists, 10% of

Framework 7's budget should be earmarked for supporting

independent scientists adopting novel approaches, and in

particular, scientists who have been persecuted for research

findings `uncomfortable' for industry, and to ensure that

research funding is not concentrated exclusively in big,

mainstream research groups.

 

To overcome the public mistrust of science and scientists,

Framework 7 should give priority to research partnerships

between scientists and local communities so that people's

concerns and aspirations can help shape the research, and

importantly, scientists could benefit from local knowledge.

For the same reasons, top priority should be given to

revitalising and protecting traditional agricultural and

healthcare systems from biopiracy and globalisation, and to

developing sciences and technologies appropriate for the

local community.

 

5. Redistributing the research budget to give priority to

science and technologies that contribute to sustainability

 

The research spending of Framework Programme 7 (FP7) is

expected to double that of Framework Programme 6 (FP6) to

nearly €40 billion over 5 years. While the funding

priorities are yet to be decided, there will be a

continuation of the FP6 areas with the addition of

`security' and `space' and `basic' research. These

priorities have already been thoroughly criticized as being

predominantly led by industry and technology, with little

regard for solving real problems in society or addressing

safety concerns.

 

The two top priorities are " Information society

technologies " and " Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology

for health " . The first includes telecommunications, mobile

phones and masts, now raising serious safety concerns all

over the world. The second, biotechnology and genomics

research, was heralded to " revolutionize " healthcare, but

the entire sector has failed financially as well as

scientifically to deliver its promises. In contrast,

environmental health and nutrition are completely missing

from the list, as are whole areas of biophysics research

into sustainable systems, cell biology and health.

 

We propose the following additions to the list of

priorities, some of them may overlap with those already

included under " Sustainable development, global change and

ecosystems " , but we want to give them more specific

emphasis.

 

Sustainable agriculture

 

In the ISP's recent briefing to the European Parliament, we

have emphasized the need to invest in sustainable

agriculture as a matter of urgency in order to feed the

world under global warming. Here are some general areas in

sustainable agriculture that require dedicated research

 

Energy conservation Water conservation Soil conservation and

carbon sequestration Soil biota and soil fertility

Biodiversity and productivity Food security, social,

cultural and financial wealth of rural communities Health

benefits Dynamic inter-relationships within sustainable

agriculture systems Conceptual, structural and policy

changes needed for sustainability

 

Ecology and energy use in sustainable systems

 

Sustainable systems refer ultimately to entire ways of life,

including agricultural and industrial production, transport,

health and economic and social relationships. Of course,

subsystems within the whole could also be studied in their

own right. The need for energy efficient production and

transport technologies is widely accepted. Not as well

acknowledged are the following topics:

 

Complexity and bio-diversity in agro-ecological systems

Energy-relationships, energy use and renewable energies

Concept of `waste' and sustainability Renewable energy

generation and bio-degradable technologies New forms of

public ownership that returns public investment in research

to the public Minimum waste generation and efficient

processes in agriculture and industry Novel ecological

accounting procedures for sustainability Biophysical

indicators of ecosystem health and monitoring technologies

Decentralised energy-efficient technologies that promote

local autonomy and participation Social environmental

indicators of sustainability Localisation and

regionalisation versus globalisation

 

Science of the organism and holistic health

 

Many new research programmes fall potentially within the

general area of " science of the organism " . The emphasis is

on non-linear complex dynamics, feedback and coherence,

which are necessary for understanding complex systems in

general. Especially important is the scientific underpinning

of complementary and alternative medical practices, in view

of the fact that homeopathy is entering mainstream medicine.

The biological effects of mobile phones and other electrical

installations in the environment, for example, also require

an appropriate biophysical understanding of the organism. We

have identified the following topics:

 

Biophysical model of the organism Understanding

complementary and alternative medical practices Concept of

holistic health that includes the social and ecological

environment Biophysical, dynamical indicators of health

Social and environmental indicators of health Non-invasive,

non-destructive technologies for monitoring health and food

quality Effective therapeutic methods based on minimum

intervention.

 

Please add your name and/or your organisation to endorse the

comment here.

http://www.indsp.org/endorsements/endorsementISP-FP7.php

 

 

 

========================================================

This article can be found on the I-SIS website at

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/ISPF7.php

 

If you like this original article from the Institute of

Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving

articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation

or purchase on our website

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/donations.

 

ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation

dedicated to providing critical public information on

cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability

and ecological sustainability in science.

 

If you would prefer to receive future mailings as HTML

please let us know.

========================================================

CONTACT DETAILS

 

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London

NW1 OXR

 

telephone: [44 1994 231623] [44 20 8452 2729] [44 20

7272 5636]

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

 

MATERIAL ON THIS SITE MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR ANY PROFIT FREE

PURPOSES WITHOUT PERMISSION, ON CONDITION THAT IT IS

ACCREDITED ACCORDINGLY AND CONTAINS A LINK TO http://www.i-

sis.org.uk/.

ANY COMMERCIAL USE MUST BE AGREED WITH ISIS