Science In and For Society

[Guest guest]

24 Aug 2005 21:46:24 -0000

Science In and For Society

press-release

 

 

 

 

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 24/08/05

 

Science In and For Society

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

 

Comments on the European Commission Proposal for Framework 7

as presented to the Council of the European Union on 6 April

2005

 

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 European Commission has now published its Proposal for

the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7). This will form the

basis for funding the European Union's science and

technology for the period 2007-2013, though we will not know

how much of it will be implemented until the EU has agreed

its overall budget and, with it, the budget for science.

 

The Independent Science Panel (ISP) submitted an earlier

comment on FP7 to the European Commission (1 April 2005)

stressing the overriding need for independent science

(http://www.i-sis.org.uk/ISPF7.php), which has now been

endorsed by 239 individuals and organisations from all over

the world (http://www.indsp.org/endorsements/signed.php).

Our present comment is in addition to the points made in the

earlier submission.

 

We wish to comment on three aspects of FP7 where we are in

general agreement with the aims but are concerned about what

will happen in practice. These are (i) science and the

developing countries, (ii) independent and innovative

science, and (iii) science in society.

 

1. Science and the developing countries

 

We welcome the proposals to cooperate with developing

countries, but they must be given much higher priority than

is suggested in the Proposal. They are mentioned in three

sections of Appendix 1, at the end of the section on

Cooperation (p15), at the end of the section on Capacities

(p44) and at the end of the section on nonnuclear actions of

the Joint Research Centre. In each case they are only a very

small part of a much broader policy.

 

Science with and for developing countries must be a priority

in its own right and should be a key part of the EU's

contribution to the developing world. We note thatate General for Development has neither a section

specifically devoted to science nor a high-ranking chief

scientific adviser, unlike (for example) the UK Department

for International Development. DG DEV should make science a

major concern within the Directorate itself, rather than

relying on other Directorates for whom the interests of the

developing world are secondary.

 

There should be two related emphases: 1. Research that is of

immediate relevance to developing countries. This would

include sustainability, both in agriculture and the food

system in general, and appropriate technology. Funding would

come from the EU, and scientists and institutions in the EU

would naturally be very much involved, but much of the

research would be carried out in the developing countries,

which would also be largely responsible for the agenda. 2.

Assistance to developing countries to strengthen their own

science and technology. Similarly, under Health on p17,

after " emerging epidemics " in the section on objectives and

again as a separate point under " Activities: translating

research for human health " , there should be explicit

reference to neglected diseases of the third world (such as

sleeping sickness and Chagas disease. Again, DG DEV should

be taking the lead.

 

2. Independent and innovative science

 

We support the aim expressed in the Proposal to support

" investigator driven frontier research " but we are concerned

about how this will be put into practice.

 

Committees that award research grants tend to be much too

conservative, especially when there is no shortage of

competent proposals that are almost guaranteed to deliver

what they promise. The European Research Council (ERC), with

a relatively large budget compared with most national

Research Councils, will be in a position to earmark a modest

proportion of its funds for genuinely innovative projects, a

proportion of which may fail to deliver. We have suggested

10% in our earlier comment.

 

This area will have to be treated differently from the rest

of ERC funding in two respects: 1. The ERC must be willing

to consider proposals for amounts that are smaller than the

present minimum. EU support will generally be sought not

because the amount is too large for national research

councils but because only a funding body with a large budget

can fund enough such projects to expect overall success even

with some failures in the portfolio. 2. The success of the

innovation programme must be judged on the programme as a

whole, not on individual projects. Indeed, for every project

in such a programme to succeed should be taken as a sign

that the committee is not doing its job properly.

 

(We owe this apparently radical suggestion to Professor

Susan Cozzens, former Director of the Office of Policy

Support at the US National Science Foundation, and also to

the brief that Microsoft gave to Professor Roger Needham

when he was setting up their European Laboratory in

Cambridge.)

 

3. Science in Society

 

We welcome the aim of encouraging a broader engagement

between scientists and the public at large. For this to be

effective, committees and regulatory bodies must include

both scientists and laypersons. Above all, it is

unsatisfactory to have committees of laypeople who are

expected to discuss only the social aspects, taking the

science as given.

 

Difficult questions of ethics, of health and safety, and of

the environment typically arise in those areas where the

science is not certain, especially, though not always, in

rapidly developing areas. In such areas, it is essential

that the scientific members of the committee adequately

represent the differing views and that they and the lay

members together reach decisions that take the uncertainty

fully into account, in accordance with the precautionary

principle.

 

When this aspect of FP7 is being reviewed, there should be

an audit on how many changes in policy and practice have

come about through work funded in this area. Obviously not

every investigation, however thorough, will lead to changes,

so the assessment will have to be made on a programme basis

(cf. our comments on innovation); but if very few

significant changes result from the work of these

committees, that should be taken as a sign that they have

not been effective.

 

Dr. Peter T Saunders Professor of Applied Mathematics,

King's College On behalf of Independent Science Panel

p.t.saunders

 

 

 

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

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

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/SIAFS.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. If you would like to be removed from our

mailing list at

 

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

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

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 NOT BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM

WITHOUT EXPLICIT PERMISSION.

FOR PERMISSION, PLEASE CONTACT enquiries