Our resources

Released in partnership with the All European Academies (ALLEA) and the European University Association (EUA), this joint statement reinforces Science Europe’s resolve to work together with its partners to uphold academic freedom and institutional autonomy, absolutely essential principles for the conducting of high-quality research in Europe.

In view of the upcoming trilogues between the three European institutions, Science Europe invites all parties to consider a series of elements to further improve the legislative package for Horizon Europe. The budget of €120bn proposed by the European Parliament is a very welcome proposal and should be taken up by the Council in the next Multiannual Financial Framework. Moreover, fundamental research must be included in all parts of the programme, including the European Innovation Council.

In this joint statement research and Innovation stakeholders call on the EU institutions to seek a balanced approach to data sharing in response to the European Commission’s proposal for a revision of the Directive on re-use of public sector information (PSI Directive). While the partners are supportive of the European agenda to promote Open Science and innovation, and share a common commitment to the principle of making research data ‘as open as possible and as closed as necessary’, there is a need to focus on the optimal re-use of research data and not on the (unconditional) opening of such data.

The overall funding for research and innovation in Europe needs to be increased and an adequate ring-fenced budget should be provided for Horizon Europe. In this factsheet Science Europe illustrates some of the reasons why.

The European Commission proposal for Horizon Europe falls short of acknowledging the importance of fundamental research. This factsheet demonstrates the essential role fundamental research plays, not only for research, but also for innovation.

Citizen science is a growing movement that enlists the public in scientific discovery, monitoring, and experimentation across a wide range of disciplines. This briefing paper looks in detail at the evolution of citizen science and citizen science policy, provides examples of initiatives from around the world, and considers the future of the activity.

‘Big Deals’ are one of the dominant but highly-disputed business models in academic publishing. The model needs to be further analysed before it can be used as an instrument to implement and increase Open Access. This workshop was as organised to trigger further expert discussions on the current business models and consider the available alternatives.

Science Europe welcomes the overall continuity between the internal structure and funding rates between Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. However, the proposed budget increase for the period 2021-2027 does not live up to the ambitious scenarios defended by the European Commission in front of the Heads of States and Governments in March 2018 and will not be sufficient for Europe to meet its ambitious political goals.

Science Europe sees interesting opportunities in the use of missions and cross-disciplinary Research and Innovation as part of Europe’s toolset to address societal or global challenges. However, the criteria for selecting missions so far have been too broad and more discussion is needed on the concept of missions and their introduction in FP9.

Science Europe welcomes all efforts made to ensure the long-term sustainability of research infrastructures. Released prior to the high-level conference on research infrastructures by the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council, this Open Letter responds to the European Commission’s Staff Working Document on their sustainability. It makes a number of recommendations, based on the key role of Science Europe’s members as funders, operators, and managers of infrastructures.

The Multiannual Financial Frameworks (MFF) determine the budget allocation of the EU over a period of seven years. Science Europe recommends strengthening science, research, and innovation by increasing their budget in the MFF for 2021–2027 and to take measures to ensure that the 9th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation will have the capacity to achieve its goals.

How can citizens best be involved in the scientific process, and how ‘Open’ can we make science? How do we ensure that the highest standards in scientific research are maintained in such a system? This report provides an overview of the main discussions at the 2017 Science Europe High-level Workshop hosted in Berlin by the German Research Foundation (DFG).

Research organisations and funders increasingly ask researchers to create Data Management Plans for their work and proposals. A lack of standardisation means that these can be time-consuming to create and difficult to compare and evaluate. Science Europe presents a framework for the creation of domain-specific protocols that can be used as standardised templates, reducing the administrative burden on both researchers, research organisations, and funders.

This is Science Europe’s response to the report ‘LAB–FAB–APP: Investing in the European Future we want’ by the High Level Group on maximising the impact of EU Research and Innovation Programmes. It outlines points of agreement, as well as additional or alternative recommendations, from Science Europe Member Organisations on how the future of European research should take shape.

Science Europe supports the principle that research data should be “as open as possible and as closed as necessary.” However, the particularity of research data as well as of data about research activities requires careful consideration on which aspects are better dealt with by legislative acts or by guidelines developed by the research sector.

Science Europe supports some of the conclusions adopted today by the EU Competitiveness Council, but is disappointed by the lack of ambition in others. The conclusions reflect the Council position on the preparation of the ninth Framework Programme (FP) for Research and Development.

Science Europe welcomes the efforts made towards the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). In this open letter, the Governing Board of Science Europe reinforces its view that research data should be permanently, publicly, and freely available for re-use. The proposed EOSC aims to further this goal but a number of important questions still remain.

A more strategic approach is needed to the co-ordination between regional, national, and European research activities and to the initiatives supporting them. This briefing presents policy makers with the Science Europe view on how to better organise regional, national, and European research efforts.

This open letter, signed by the European Research and Innovation community, calls on Members of the European Parliament and the Council to secure Europe’s leadership in the data economy by revising the Text and Data Mining (TDM) exception in the draft of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. It calls for the TDM exception to apply to any person that has legal access to the content to help the European data economy grow, foster innovation, and encourage entrepreneurship.

Fundamental science and curiosity-driven research are key drivers of change for their intrinsic value and long-term unexpected impact. However, many other aspects are also important such as challenge oriented research and co-creation of knowledge. This report captures key discussions from Science Europe’s first Symposium on impact and includes four case studies illustrating the unexpected impact of research on subjects ranging from privacy to nano-encapsulation.

This open letter issued by the international research community calls on Members of the European Parliament to halt the adoption of harmful provisions found in the current draft of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which could threaten Open Access and Open Science.

This report explores the challenges facing research funding and performing organisations to design and manage balanced Research Infrastructure (RI) portfolios and design effective cross-border collaborations when setting up and running joint RIs. Discussions with a broad range of stakeholders took place at a dedicated workshop co-hosted by Science Foundation Ireland and the Health Research Board.

Science Europe advocates using the notion of ‘value’ of research. This is wider than ‘impact’ and reflects the intrinsic value of scientific research and its capacity to generate new knowledge. This statement provides a series of key principles and actions for policy makers and research organisations to help bring forward a new vision of impact assessment.

Science Europe shares eight key principles to shape the future Framework Programme. Examples of its European added value include the ERC’s role in fostering Europe-wide competition, the support of Research Infrastructures as a fundamental part of the European research system, and the support of collaborative research to solve societal challenges that cannot be addressed purely with national efforts.

This workshop aimed to advance implementation of the recommendations published in Science Europe’s Survey Report ‘Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe Member Organisations.’ The workshop explored the challenges in taking forward certain recommendations through the discussion of case studies presented by organisations that have already tackled some of the more difficult issues.