European science in urgent need of a ‘big idea’

The Lisbon Agenda urgently needs "spectacular initiatives in Europe, ideas that will really attract attention, and get people coming here from all over the world", according to Michal Kleiber, one of Europe’s most influential scientists.

Speaking to European Voice on the margins of a conference in Warsaw on the EU’s 2007-13 framework programme for research (FP7), Kleiber said it was "entirely unacceptable" how Europe’s scientists had failed to connect with the public, which did not recognise science as something vital.

In Poland, despite excellent science fairs, people were "bored stiff" with the subject of implementing inventions, he explained.

America had had the Moon and Star Wars space programmes. "We need to work on our creativity. Europe is shy," said Kleiber, adding: "Europe should be a great centre of research."

A former Polish science minister, he now advises the Polish president on science policy. Last year he was elected to the Scientific Council, the policy-setting board of the European Research Council, described by Science Commissioner Janez Potoc?nik as "a kind of champions’ league of knowledge".

Kleiber said promising areas for EU scientific initiatives included bio-medicines, materials for use in micro-surgery, the Galileo satellite navigation system, a rival to the US’ global positioning system (GPS), and energy. Methods for the gasification of coal were "essentially unexplored", he said, adding that better, cleaner forms of nuclear power were also promising.

Kleiber himself had helped negotiate the project to build a €10 billion nuclear fusion reactor, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (Iter) at Cadarache, north of Marseilles, a form of nuclear energy which does not create radioactive waste. It is the world’s biggest joint scientific project after the International Space Station.

Europe’s failure to exploit and keep much of its wealth of talent was because of the "hopelessly fragmented" character of research, according to Kleiber, with between 50% and 70% of projects overlapping or missing obvious synergies. The 5% of the EU budget being allocated to FP7 was a small but crucial margin: "It forces member states to create teams and make them compatible on a European level. Joint projects will grow."

In contrast to scientific funding in the US, the fragmentation of EU funding meant it was in practice difficult for researchers to move around Europe. Scientists corresponded and met at conferences, but this was not the same thing as working together. Joint projects were as crucial for innovation as for achieving a proper level of synergy: "We need a common market in research."

Kleiber said he was pleased with the Commission’s simplification of framework programme procedures, FP7’s greater flexibility and with the budget, which at €8bn a year was less than had been hoped, but up 40% on FP6.

Among its provisions is further financing of scientists to reintegrate at home once a contract or project is over: Poland, like the rest of Europe, is experiencing a brain-drain to better-equipped and financed US universities. Under the current programme, 50 Polish academics took advantage of such mobility grants.

The Lisbon Agenda urgently needs "spectacular initiatives in Europe, ideas that will really attract attention, and get people coming here from all over the world", according to Michal Kleiber, one of Europe’s most influential scientists.