The funder supporting foundational research in dermatology

For dermatology researchers, the Denmark-based Leo Foundation is a particularly valuable funder. The foundation, which owns the pharmaceutical company Leo Pharma, manages financial assets of around €2.3 billion and is looking to raise its spending on research in the next few years.

As part of its funding portfolio, the foundation offers research grants of €270,000-€540,000, lasting one to three years. These are available to researchers in any country via three annual rounds. The next deadline is 28 February, followed by 23 June and 31 August. Projects in basic, translational or clinical dermatology are welcomed; the Leo Foundation does not fund projects on skin cancer.

Chief scientific officer Anne-Marie Engel explains what the panel looks for in bids.

How much funding is the Leo Foundation expecting to award this year?

We expect to give around €27 million. Our aspiration and ambition is that by 2025, it will be €33.5m. We are also increasing the number of grant-making instruments. 

What is the aim of the research grant scheme?

We want to give an opportunity to as many researchers as possible. The grants are not very large, but they are there to help and support researchers with innovative ideas in dermatology research, in a broad sense, going from basic to clinical. 

How many grants are you expecting to award?

Between 25 and 30. We have an agreement with our board about how we expect to distribute funding across the different grant-making instruments we have. But it also depends on the applications we get, so if for one scheme there’s more quality than expected, we can add a bit to the budget. If there’s not enough quality, we won’t award as many grants. We usually get around 30 applications per round. The success rate was quite high in 2022, but it does vary. The average success rate over the past five years is 19 per cent.

Where do applications come from, geographically speaking?

We get most of our applications from Europe and North America, but we’re seeing increasing numbers from the Asia-Pacific, specifically Australia, which
we’re thrilled about.

Why are skin cancer projects not eligible?

It’s easier to get funding from other agencies for cancer research than for other skin disease-related research. We want to give researchers of other skin diseases a chance to get funding. However, we do permit applications where skin cancer is used as a model to look into other mechanistic hypotheses and ideas for other skin diseases. 

What’s the relative distribution of basic research grants against clinical ones?

It’s not level, let me say. We get more applications for basic research and that’s reflected in the awards, but we very much invite applications in translational and clinical research. In the future, as we increase our grant amounts, we will also have some thematic grants that invite, in a more focused way, researchers in those areas.

Is there a minimum level of experience required to apply?

People must have a PhD or equivalent, and we mostly award grants to assistant professors and above. Your experience as a research leader is, of course, part of the evaluation.

What are you looking for in applications?

We’re looking for excellence, and the potential for step change in an area. Our board asks us about the potential for leaps forward every time we meet. At the same time, it’s important to make sure that really good research groups and research environments can continue on course towards new knowledge and, hopefully, new treatments.

Are there any common mistakes that applicants should avoid?

A common mistake is that people fail to read the small print in the instructions to applicants. They sometimes forget to attach some of the mandatory documents so that when we screen the applications for eligibility, we reject them for administrative reasons. Also, we have a very clear scope for our philanthropic activities—dermatology research, from basic to clinical—you reduce your chance of winning to near-zero if you don’t stay within it. 

Are there any elements that would make an application stand out?

We like that when people apply they have some kind of feasibility analysis of the proposed project. So if they don’t have all the expertise and infrastructure in-house, within their group, it’s important for us to see who they are teaming up with, to make
sure that they cover all the expertise needed.

What would your top advice be to applicants?

The main advice would be to read the application guidelines carefully, then ask us if there’s something you think is unclear. It’s a pity if people think they are a fit for the Leo Foundation and it turns out that they are not, and that kind of question can very easily be clarified by an email or a phone call.

This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact [email protected]

The post More than skin deep appeared first on Research Professional News.

“Concrete” support demanded for academics prevented by authoritarian regimes from freely conducting research

European researcher groups have called for “concrete” support for academics persecuted for their research activity by authoritarian regimes.

In a joint statement released on 21 February, the European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers, the International Consortium of Research Staff Associations, the Marie Curie Alumni Association and the Young Academy of Europe proclaimed their solidarity with researchers they said were facing injustice in countries with authoritarian regimes, with a particular focus on Iran.

“We strongly advocate for concrete support to researchers persecuted for their research activity by any authoritarian regime, and here specifically for concrete support to researchers in Iran,” the statement said.

Detention and torture

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, a large number of researchers have been arrested, detained and tortured by the Iranian authorities because of their research, the groups said. One they named was Iranian-Swedish disaster medicine researcher Ahmadreza Djalali, who has been accused of espionage and sentenced to death.

“We feel the need to highlight our support for the freedom of all scholars to carry out research from their chosen cultural and/or political perspective in a safe and respectful environment,” said the associations.

“This is even more important for those scholars who are based in, or come from, non-Western countries: their perspective can be novel to the majority of the European academic community, and thus they may be more exposed to epistemic violence or injustice. We all need to ensure that this does not happen.”

Double the danger

Since September, there have been ongoing protests in Iran (pictured) following the death of Mahsa Amini after her arrest for allegedly not wearing a hijab. To be a woman and a scholar is “even more dangerous” than being either alone, the joint statement said.

It added that research organisations and individual researchers should “make it their priority to respect and value academic integrity, while actively guaranteeing academic freedom as a human right”.

The post European groups take stance against researcher ‘persecution’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Consultation launched amid geopolitical, environmental and technological changes

The European University Association, which represents over 800 universities, has launched a consultation to consider the future of collaboration among higher education institutions.

University collaboration is being affected by ongoing crises and uncertainty from geopolitical, economic, social, environmental and technological change, the EUA said as it announced the consultation project on 16 February.

Through workshops, interviews with academic experts and discussions with national rectors’ conferences, the consultation—under the Universities and the future of Europe (Unife) project—aims to develop “concrete ideas” about what universities want from future collaboration and what they need in terms of framework conditions and political structures.

EUA president Michael Murphy will chair an advisory board overseeing the project, which he said “is not about trying to look into a crystal ball to predict the future. It is about using strategic foresight to gain insight and inspire action in the present for a better future for our societies and universities.”

EUA has announced two events for university leaders as part of the project: an online workshop on 28 March and in-person workshops at the European University Institute in Florence, Italy on 22-23 May.

The post University group ponders future of collaboration appeared first on Research Professional News.

“Students cannot be used as bargaining chips” by politicians, union complains

A group representing students across Europe has called for Switzerland to be allowed to regain full access to the EU’s Erasmus+ academic mobility programme, saying the existing freeze-out is harming the continent’s young people.

Switzerland lost its full so-called ‘association’ to Erasmus in 2014, preventing its organisations and students from participating in most of the programme’s activities or receiving funding from it.

It later introduced an alternative funding scheme for international exchange activities, called the Siww-European Mobility Programme, but student groups have renewed longstanding criticisms that this alternative is falling short.

The European Students’ Union said on 16 February that the replacement scheme is “not enough”.

“The current lack of access to the Erasmus+ programme puts both European and Swiss young people at a disadvantage, especially in regards to the financial aid available for mobility,” the ESU said.

It urged the European Commission to work with the Swiss government on resuming the country’s association to Erasmus+.

“Establishing a framework of mobility cooperation [with] Switzerland is paramount, and that needs to be decoupled from non-related political negotiations,” the union said, adding: “Students cannot be used as bargaining chips.”

The post European student group demands Swiss association to Erasmus+ appeared first on Research Professional News.

EU should also invest more in artificial intelligence research, university group says

Higher education institutions will have to adapt their learning, teaching and assessment processes to account for the growing availability of artificial intelligence tools to students and other users, according to the European University Association. 

The group of more than 800 higher education institutions warned its members on 14 February that banning the use of AI tools would be “completely futile”, despite concerns about use of the technology within academia, such as lack of references to sources of information and biases in data and algorithms.

ChatGPT and other similar AI tools have sparked concern among educators in recent months over their potential to affect learning, teaching and student assessment, the EUA pointed out.

But it said there are also “numerous” potential benefits of AI for academic work, including improved efficiency, personalised working and new ways of learning.

“The higher education sector must adapt its learning, teaching and assessment approaches in such a way that AI is used effectively and appropriately,” the EUA said in a position paper.

It urged universities to explore the responsible use of AI tools while considering their legal framework and the broader consequences for society, culture and the economy.

Institutional policies on AI should be updated and guidance on day-to-day use of AI should be developed, the EUA said.

More research funding needed

On the same day, the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities called on the EU to invest more in fundamental research into AI and digitisation generally.

It said that Europe is “still lagging China and the US, among others, in terms of digital technologies”, and that without pursuing knowledge in these areas it will struggle to be globally competitive.

Jan Palmowski, secretary-general of the Guild, flagged Google’s new AI chatbot and Microsoft’s recent decision to introduce the OpenAI chatbot into its search engine as “evidence of how AI will dominate our everyday lives”.

“If we want our digital future to be determined not by the strategies of private companies but by the public interest and the values Europeans hold dear, we must invest in research,” he said.

The post Universities ‘must adapt to AI’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers aims to showcase “great variety” of sector

A group representing early career researchers in Europe has launched a media campaign aimed at reducing what it says are stereotypical views of women researchers.

The European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers (Eurodoc) campaign launched on 11 February, which is International Day of Women and Girls in Science, and will run until International Women’s Day on 8 March.

“Eurodoc has reflected on how much the discourse to advance gender equality in research is built mostly within a broad framework of stereotypes on what women are, and what research is,” the group explained.

“Try searching the web for pictures of female researchers and you will be met mostly by a portrayal of a woman with a microscope. However, we all know that not all research is done in a lab.”

Eurodoc says it wants to highlight the “great variety” of female researchers, demonstrate how collaborative research is and highlight the role researchers play in advocating for society.

Women active in research are being invited to describe their work and motivations for the campaign, which will highlight them on social media.

“We believe that all early career researchers are role models [for each other], and we hope that the diversity that you will meet here can inspire many to pursue a career in research,” Eurodoc said.

The post Campaign targets stereotypes around female researchers appeared first on Research Professional News.

EU reveals applications received for European Universities Initiative call with record €384 million budget

Almost 300 universities have applied to create new alliances under the EU’s European Universities Initiative for financing cross-border collaborations among higher education institutions.

In addition, more than 200 universities have applied to strengthen existing EUI alliances, which carry out collaborative work such as creating joint campuses, qualifications and posts.

Altogether, just over 500 universities have come together to create 65 proposals for a share of the €384 million offered by the 2023 EUI call, the European Commission announced on 9 February. This is the highest call budget yet for the scheme.

Following initial 2019 and 2020 EUI calls and the first follow-up call in 2022, there are now 44 EUI alliances involving 340 higher education institutions across the continent, funded through the EU’s Erasmus+ scheme for academic mobility and, to a lesser extent, by its R&D programme.

The 2023 call aims to bring the initiative closer to its target of supporting 60 alliances involving over 500 higher education institutions by mid-2024.

In a change from the three previous calls, countries in the Western Balkans were allowed to apply to become full partners in the EUI alliances this year. The Commission said that universities from four of the six Western Balkan countries applied to the call.

The wide interest in taking part in the scheme came despite a study commissioned by the European Parliament education committee finding that the initiative is operating in an “unsustainable” and “disjointed” way.

That study called for improved funding for the EUI, underscoring concerns already raised by the alliances that the current funding is insufficient to support the high ambitions being set for them.

The post Almost 300 more universities seek to join EU-backed alliances appeared first on Research Professional News.

Trials of European degree labels and a new legal status promise broader sectoral benefits

Consortia running EU-funded projects testing new forms of cross-border university cooperation have formally brought together EU-backed university alliances for the first time, but say they want their results to benefit the sector more broadly.

Last month, the European Commission announced funding for 10 projects to pilot criteria for a joint European degree label and to trial a possible legal status for cross-border university alliances.

Ninety higher education institutions are directly involved, many of which are already members of alliances funded by the EU’s European Universities Initiative to work on schemes such as joint campuses and courses.

Several projects involve multiple alliances, including one called Future-proof Criteria for Innovative European Education, which brings together the nine-member Young Universities for the Future of Europe alliance, the 13-member European Consortium of Innovative Universities (ECIU) and a third EUI alliance.

Aleksandar Šušnjar, who coordinates Foci as well as the Yufe membership of the University of Rijeka in Croatia (pictured), said this first-ever formal cooperation of EUI alliances provides an “interesting additional layer” to the pilots.

“I think that is great because, in general, we need more cooperation between alliances,” he said. 

The year-long Foci project will use draft Commission criteria as a “starting point” to analyse what stakeholders, including students, companies and quality-assurance agencies, need from a joint-degree label.

It will then adapt the criteria to existing joint programmes and simulate use of the label, to devise policy recommendations.

Šušnjar acknowledged concerns from some over whether such a label would just rebrand existing collaboration tools. Many joint programmes already exist and a European approach to quality assurance for them has not yet been fully implemented. He said the criteria must set out what makes a degree European rather than national.

Foci will provide some “direction”, he said, but added: “It is such a big question that it cannot be answered within a one-year project. This question needs to be answered by wider higher education policy discussions in Europe and we see this project as just one of the inputs.”

Another label pilot, European Degree—Advancing, Facilitating and Fostering International Collaboration in Higher Education, involving six EUI alliances, will focus on overcoming legislative obstacles to joint programmes. 

ECIU is also involved in another pilot, which it said will assess alliances’ need for a legal status by experimenting with joint recruitment, curricula and resources.

Yufe director Daniela Trani said the pilots would aim for benefits beyond the alliances: “Alliances are sometimes thought of as an elite group of consortia. But we feel a responsibility to work in a way that is really going to be of value to other institutions.”   

This article also appeared in Research Europe

The post EU university alliances team up on pilots appeared first on Research Professional News.

Faith in the Wellcome Trust’s guidance can bring rewards

The Wellcome Trust overhauled its funding schemes in 2021 to give researchers “more freedom, time and financial resources to pursue their ideas”. Its early career awards are now among the most generous grants available to researchers with a maximum of three years’ postdoctoral experience (allowances are made for personal circumstances).

Each award provides a salary for the grantee and up to £400,000 (€455,000) in research expenses to cover up to five years of research. 

The goal of the awards is that, by the end of the project, the research will have advanced understanding of human health and wellbeing, and the researcher will be ready to lead an independent programme of their own.

Awards may be undertaken at host institutions in the UK, the Republic of Ireland or low- and middle-income countries, excluding India and mainland China. But researchers can split their time with another institute in Europe or elsewhere. The scheme has deadlines every three or four months, with the next one set for 21 February.

Sara Mederos, a neuroscientist who completed a PhD at the Cajal Institute in Madrid, Spain, before moving to the Sainsbury Wellcome Centre in the UK in 2020, won her early career award in 2023. She discusses her path to a successful application.

What is your project about?

Brain circuits in an area called the ventral lateral geniculate nucleus (vLGN) have been shown to have strong control over fear reactions. I’m testing the hypothesis that the vLGN is a crucial hub for integrating external sensory signals with the internal state and knowledge of an animal.

How is this relevant to human health, which is the Wellcome Trust’s concern?

While it is normal to experience fear in certain situations, we can adjust our fear responses depending on our knowledge and circumstances. 

Such control is crucial, since its impairment can lead to anxiety disorders such as phobias or post-traumatic stress disorder, in which the circuits in the brain associated with fear and anxiety are thought to become overactive.

Where are you doing your work?

My host institution is the Sainsbury Wellcome Centre. Part of the project is going to be carried out at the Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown in Lisbon, Portugal. 

This award encourages you to develop in preparation for an independent career. Having the possibility of visiting two labs and learning their different ways is relevant there. During the application process, involving both centres meant I got input from both sides. The more input, the better. 

How did you find the application process?

The Wellcome team are responsive to queries and will give you a hand. The example model proposal they provide is also useful. Following the application guidance and process helped me think about my project: the elevator pitch, what I planned to do and why it is important. 

Did you find costing the project difficult?

If you have not been exposed to these kinds of things before, you might find it tricky. But I got lots of help from Brian Fenelon [a finance manager] at the Sainsbury Wellcome Centre. Most research centres will have someone involved in project management who can help.

The Wellcome Trust encourages applicants to move away from their current host environment, but you did not. How did you justify that?

The focus of the award is not so much to move away from your research environment, but to show your proposal is in line with developing your own research identity. 

In any case, at the moment I applied, I had only been in the lab for a year and it still felt like a novel research environment. 

Also, I did change the focus of my science from my PhD. 

In line with both aspects, in the proposal and at interview, I stressed that the research environments and collaborations proposed were those that would be the best support for reaching the goals of the research. 

It is important to express how you build independence, in the proposal and at interview. 

You need to specifically set out what you are bringing in terms of perspectives, ideas and research ideas.

What are your tips for the interview?

In the interview, just like in the proposal, you need to be clear, but you need to change how you convey your message. It is no longer a written proposal; you have to be persuasive. So try to enjoy it and show you are passionate about your research question. 

It is also important to be yourself. During my interview, I had fun discussing the project.

Were you informed of who would be on the panel?

Yes, Wellcome lets you know who is on panel. It is important to research your panel because you need to know who you are conveying the message to and what background you need to provide them so they can follow you. That is true whether you are giving an interview or writing a proposal, of course.

This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact [email protected]

The post Trust Wellcome appeared first on Research Professional News.

Public consultation to inform European Commission proposal for creation of European Education Area

The European Commission has launched a public consultation on learning mobility, as part of wider efforts to make studying abroad “a normality rather than an exception”.

The consultation will feed into a Commission policy proposal planned later this year to update the bloc’s learning-mobility framework. Changes to the framework will aim to overcome barriers to student mobility, which is a key goal of the EU in creating a European Education Area by 2025.

Announcing the launch of the public consultation on 8 February, EU R&D and education commissioner Mariya Gabriel said “it should be made easier” for students to discover and take up opportunities to move between education systems in different countries. “This public consultation is an opportunity to listen to all involved stakeholders and make the European Education Area a reality,” she said.

According to the consultation document, “The aim of the initiative is to move towards an objective of the European Education Area of making learning periods abroad for everyone a normality, rather than an exception.”

The Commission said it wanted opportunities for learning and teaching abroad to be available to “everyone” rather than only higher education students, who already benefit from the EU’s Erasmus+ academic-mobility funding scheme. The updated framework will target learners in all sectors and at all levels, it said.

It also plans to enable more people to benefit from the Erasmus+ programme after a 2022 survey found that just 15 per cent of young people had studied, trained or carried out an apprenticeship in another EU country.

The Commission also said it intends to remove barriers to work-based mobility and look for opportunities to strengthen ties between education and innovation.

It said it wants to hear the views of learners and educators, particularly organisations involved in mobility schemes. The deadline to submit feedback is 3 May.

The post EU consults on plans to make studying abroad ‘a normality’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

European University Association calls for a less “utilitarian” approach to R&D impact

A group representing European universities is to push policymakers to take a less “utilitarian” approach to considering the impacts of R&D and adopt a broader view of innovation.

The European University Association on 7 February published an agenda on how it would support innovation in the higher education sector up until 2026, saying it would “pursue key demands” on policymakers, funders and universities themselves.

These demands include taking a broader view of innovation, the EUA said, because policymakers “do not always recognise [the] multifaceted nature of innovation, nor do they demonstrate sufficient awareness of it”.

The association said it was “important to foster favourable conditions for innovation” rather than focusing “purely” on the outcomes of innovation, such as new technologies.

Mission critical

Against a backdrop of global competition for emerging technologies, the EU has put an increased emphasis on supporting innovation through its Horizon Europe R&I programme.

As part of Horizon Europe, the EU has adopted five R&I-based missions aimed at increasing the impact of researchers’ work on major social challenges, covering climate, cancer, oceans, cities and soil.

But the EUA said that an increasing focus of R&I policies on directionality and mission-driven approaches “risks detracting from curiosity-driven research in favour of more utilitarian notions of impact”.

“Long-term oriented research, including curiosity-driven research, should be recognised as the prerequisite of truly revolutionary, rather than purely incremental, innovation,” the EUA added.

Long-term endeavour

The group’s president, Michael Murphy, said that the EUA would increase its work in innovation and “recognises that it will be a long-term endeavour”.

“Unfortunately, innovation is not yet fully embedded in the operation of all universities, even when they clearly identify it as a strategic priority,” he added.

As well as broadening the understanding of innovation, the EUA outlined two more priority areas: institutional innovation capacity, competence and culture; and universities as honest brokers in innovation for a sustainable future.

The post EUA to push policymakers toward broader view of innovation appeared first on Research Professional News.

European Students’ Union estimates up to 10,000 people are being affected

Student representatives have raised concerns that border authorities in Ukraine are preventing people from leaving the country to study, saying this is happening even though students are supposed to be excluded from laws drafting men into the army.

The European Students’ Union, which estimates that about 9,000-10,000 students are affected, has called for Ukrainian authorities to allow students to exit the country to continue or start their studies.

“We have raised the issue…with the Ukrainian authorities, the European Commission and the [EU] member states,” ESU president Matteo Vespa told Research Professional News.

Ukraine’s ministries responsible for foreign affairs and education did not respond to a request for comment by the time this story was published. Vespa said the ban applies to all of the country’s borders.

Hundreds of complaints

On 2 February, the ESU published a statement together with the Slovak Student Council for Higher Education (ŠRVŠ), saying that they had been receiving complaints of not being allowed to leave Ukraine from hundreds of students in the country since the summer of 2022.

“Students tried several times to cross the border, but despite fulfilling all the conditions, they were denied their right to education,” the statement said.

It added that the ŠRVŠ had asked the Slovak government to help, but so far was not aware of any action the government had taken. The government had not responded to a request for comment from Research Professional News by the time this story was published.

ESU and ŠRVŠ have now asked Slovak members of the European Parliament for help with the situation.

‘Situation is unfair’

About 200 students have been unable to leave Ukraine to study at the Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, according to its vice-rector for education, Mikuláš Bittera. He said some of these students have tried to take part in online classes, but that this is not always possible.

The university believes problems with students leaving Ukraine are due to martial law rules imposed following Russia’s invasion. “According to our information, in Ukraine there is a ban on leaving the country for men over the age of 18 due to mobilisation,” Bittera said.

“We consider it unfair if students who have already studied at our university for a certain period of time cannot attend their studies properly,” he added. “This situation does not please anyone, we have to deal with the increasing number of psychological patients among students.”

Lack of clarity

Vespa questioned why students were not being allowed to leave Ukraine. He said “theoretically” the situation could be linked to the martial law rules. But he added that people studying in Ukraine or abroad were meant to be exempt from the draft, so said it was “not clear on what basis the ban is there”. 

He added: “Apparently, the general worry of the Ukrainian government is the possible brain drain from the country.”

This would be illogical, he said, because “these students would have been enrolled in higher education abroad anyway” and “the treatment they’re subject [to] is not encouraging them to stay once it will be possible again to cross the border”.

The post Students complain they are being prevented from leaving Ukraine appeared first on Research Professional News.

European Parliament research committee formally calls for change to EU treaties

MEPs with responsibility for research have formally called for the EU’s legal treaties to be changed to better protect academic freedom.

At the end of last year, MEP Christian Ehler, who chairs the European Parliament’s Panel for the Future of Science and Technology, revealed plans to amend the EU’s underpinning legal treaties, as they currently make limited reference to academic freedom, which is perceived as being under threat in Europe and around the world.

The Parliament’s research committee has now sent a letter to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, which is in charge of dealing with the EU’s treaties, calling for academic freedom to be “clearly” enshrined in them.

The letter, sent on 24 January by research committee chair Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, demands that “the protection of and respect for academic freedom, including institutional autonomy, be clearly enshrined in the treaties, strengthening their legal protection throughout the EU”.

It adds that this should be done by inserting a phrase setting out that the EU “shall respect and promote academic freedom and the freedom to conduct research as an individual and institutional right”.

The constitutional affairs committee is set to propose a motion for a resolution to amend the treaties, but Ehler warned last year that doing so to protect academic freedom would require discussions with the European Commission and Council of EU that would be “painful [and] complicated, [and] it’s hard to tell what we’re going to achieve”. 

In November, the Parliament launched an annual monitoring report on academic freedom to better safeguard it against erosion.

The post MEPs follow up on promise to defend academic freedom appeared first on Research Professional News.

Doctoral candidates have lower satisfaction rates than more experienced Marie Skłodowska-Curie fellows, survey finds

Less experienced researchers funded by the EU’s doctoral and postdoctoral funding scheme are less happy with it than their more experienced counterparts, a survey has found.

The Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions programme carries out end-of-fellowship surveys and follow-up surveys two years later to gain insights into researchers’ experience with the scheme, as well as their acquired skills and subsequent career path.

The latest survey results, published on 30 January, showed that experienced researchers, from postdoctoral level onwards, were generally happier with their MSCA host institution than doctoral candidates.

Although the large majority of MSCA doctoral candidates were generally happy with their host, they tended to report lower satisfaction for integration, assistance and supervision than researchers with more experience.

Satisfaction with supervision

For example, 8 per cent of doctoral candidates said the supervision they received was poor or very poor, while just 3 per cent of experienced researchers said the same.

“The results suggest that especially some doctoral candidates have more expectations and needs with regard to the supervision due to the very early stage of their career,” the MSCA report said.

According to the report, the survey findings emphasise the need to promote and implement the MSCA’s guidelines on supervision, which are meant to be used by host institutions and supervisors to ensure researchers are given proper guidance throughout their research projects.

Different takes on training

Doctoral candidates were also less happy with the training they received during their MSCA project, with about 6 per cent considering it to be poor or very poor.

Just 80 per cent of doctoral candidates on the MSCA’s CoFund scheme found the training to be good or very good, compared with 90 per cent of the postdoctoral researchers on Individual Fellowships.

This divide between more and less experienced researchers persisted in job success: the survey found that 18 per cent of doctoral candidates from the CoFund and 15 per cent from the Innovative Training Network schemes were unemployed immediately after the fellowship, compared with 10 per cent of postdoctoral researchers.

The post Less experienced researchers less happy with MSCA support appeared first on Research Professional News.

Deals with Canada, Faroe Islands and New Zealand could all be blocked by European Parliament

There is a “major issue” preventing some non-EU countries from becoming associate members of the bloc’s Horizon Europe R&D programme, according to a leading MEP.

Christian Ehler (pictured), a senior member of the European Parliament’s research committee, told Research Professional News that the European Parliament has concerns about how the deals have been structured for the Faroe Islands and New Zealand.

He said in a committee session last week that the deal for the Faroe Islands is being “blocked” by the Parliament, and told Research Professional News that a deal agreed with New Zealand is heading the same way.

Research Professional News also understands that a planned deal with Canada is set to face the same obstacle.

Faroe Islands ‘blocked’

The EU has encouraged countries beyond the bloc’s near neighbourhood to associate to its R&D programme for the first time. Association gives countries access on almost the same terms as EU member states in exchange for a budget contribution.

So far, a deal has been struck under this new route with New Zealand, and formal negotiations with Canada are expected to conclude in the first half of 2023. Informal talks with Japan and South Korea are also well underway, and more-exploratory talks are taking place with Australia and Singapore.

Sixteen countries nearer the EU have already signed agreements to associate to the €95.5 billion Horizon Europe programme. But at a meeting of the Parliament research committee on 24 January, Ehler said the agreement with the Faroe Islands had been “blocked” by MEPs.

The issue is that the agreement has been legally structured to apply indefinitely, he said, rather than only to Horizon Europe.

“The Commission is choosing a construction where the Parliament would grant a yes or a no, but in terms of a yes [that would be] to an agreement that would be forever, so we [MEPs] would be out for the next programme,” Ehler said in the committee session.

“It can’t be then that we grant access to the programmes forever, based on a legal change. So the Faroe Islands are blocked,” he added.

Ehler told Research Professional News that MEPs are unhappy the Parliament will not have enough oversight of future association to EU R&D programmes.

“The agreement is structured in such a way that if the Parliament consents to it now, it gives the Commission an unconditional permanent mandate on the association to future framework programmes,” he said.

Not only the Faroe Islands

Ehler added that the situation also applies to the deal the EU reached with New Zealand at the end of 2022, which the European Parliament has not yet been asked to consent to.

“The Commission has created very difficult situations regarding Faroe Islands and New Zealand because it has concluded agreements for which it knew it would not get Parliamentary consent,” Ehler said.

The same structure is also expected to be used in any agreement reached with Canada.

The Commission declined to comment but Research Professional News understands that the structure of the agreements with the Faroe Islands, New Zealand and Canada were directed by the Council of EU member state governments.

The structure would use special joint committees to decide on participation in EU programmes. It is widely used in international agreements for which the EU has a more overarching political relationship with a country—for example, those looking to join the EU or that are in the European Economic Area.

But Ehler said Parliament has “always maintained that the nature of the ‘new’ association agreements makes them too political to rely on the common practice” and that “the Parliament’s opposition to consenting to the agreements is a major issue”.

“The agreements are fundamentally different and require, for each new association, Parliamentary oversight,” Ehler said. He added that if the conflict with the Commission is not resolved, it “might impact” further ambitions to expand Horizon Europe globally, “which, to be clear, is not what the Parliament wants”.

Provisional participation

For now, the Faroe Islands can take part in Horizon Europe while the ratification process is completed, and the same will be true for New Zealand.

But a parliamentary insider told Research Professional News that if no solution is found, there is the potential for the Parliament to vote down the agreements.

A spokesperson for the Faroe Islands government said the country has completed its own ratification process. “We have no comments on the internal EU process, and we expect that the EU will conclude its ratification process in the near future,” they said.

Loveday Kempthorne, manager of international science partnerships for New Zealand’s Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, said the New Zealand government is “satisfied with the agreement we have reached” but that the agreement “remains subject to the approval of the New Zealand Cabinet, the European Parliament and EU member states”.

“Discussion around this approval is a natural and welcome part of the democratic process,” Kempthorne added.

The post MEP warns ‘major issue’ could derail some Horizon deals appeared first on Research Professional News.

EU selects 10 projects involving 90 universities to test proposed ways to foster collaboration

The EU has launched 10 pilot projects that will test criteria for a joint European degree label and trial a possible legal status for university alliances.

The joint degree label is intended as a step towards increased awarding of joint degrees spanning several EU member states, which in turn is intended to encourage academic mobility and cooperation.

The legal status for university alliances is being explored as a way of encouraging more structured cooperation between universities in different countries, on activities including joint degrees, campuses and research positions.

EU research and education commissioner Mariya Gabriel announced on 31 January that the 10 projects had been selected following a call for proposals in June. The projects will be carried out by groups directly involving 90 higher education institutions.

Among the participants are institutions from more than 20 of the alliances being funded by the EU through its European Universities Initiative scheme. This is funding alliances of universities in multiple European countries to carry out cross-border collaborations on initiatives such as joint courses and campuses.

Some of the participants in these EUI alliances have said their work is being held back by the lack of coherent underpinning regulation, such as that being trialled by the projects.

Work with authorities

Six of the funded projects will use existing joint programmes to test criteria developed by the European Commission for the joint degree label. The other four will focus on testing new forms of cooperation, such as the legal status for university alliances.

Gabriel said she was “happy” that 90 higher education institutions are involved in the projects. She added that the Commission will “work closely together with the selected projects to explore and examine, hand in hand with the higher education stakeholders and national authorities, ways to make transnational cooperation easier for the benefit of Europe’s students, higher education institutions and their staff members”.

Each of the two pilot schemes has a budget of €1 million and the selected projects can receive up to €200,000 for one year. The funding comes from the EU’s academic mobility scheme Erasmus+ and projects are expected to start in the spring.

The winning groups will work with national, regional and institutional authorities, and offer evidence and proposals for the next steps of the two concepts.

One of the degree label projects will be carried out by a consortium of six of the EUI alliances: Una Europa, 4EU+, CHARM-EU, EC2U, EU-CONEXUS and Unite!

“With this powerhouse of a consortium, we hope to bring about tangible progress towards our common aim of making the development and implementation of joint degrees in Europe a less complex and resource-intensive undertaking,” said KU Leuven rector Luc Sels, on behalf of Una Europa.

The post Pilots launched for joint degree label and university alliance status appeared first on Research Professional News.

University group says EU R&D programme would benefit from better integration of SSAH disciplines

The EU’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme needs to better integrate the full breadth of social sciences, arts and humanities disciplines to fulfil its potential, a university group has warned.

“It is critical that Horizon Europe benefits from the broadest possible range of academic perspectives and methodologies, appropriate to the challenge to be addressed,” the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities said in an opinion paper it published on 31 January.

It said that “a more systematic and clear approach is needed to ensure the best possible implementation” of this integration of SSAH disciplines.

In the past, EU R&D programmes have “[sold] short” the capacity of SSAH disciplines to contribute to solving societal challenges, the Guild said.

It called for “more explicit references to the significance and roles of the contributions from SSAH” in Horizon Europe to ensure that consortia applying to the second pillar, focused on societal challenges and industrial competitiveness, include partners with SSAH expertise.

In addition, it reiterated a call for an independent expert group to evaluate the integration of SSAH into Horizon Europe and advise the European Commission on improvements.

The Guild praised what it said was “the strong support provided” to SSAH in the first pillar of Horizon Europe, focused on research excellence, saying it enables researchers to tackle cultural, societal or policy challenges in a self-directed way.

But it said the strategic orientations set by politicians for the second pillar should provide a clear framework for SSAH collaboration, and that there should be consistency but also flexibility in these orientations to help facilitate such work.

The post Horizon ‘needs breadth’ of social sciences, arts and humanities appeared first on Research Professional News.

Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment also expected to agree support for working groups

The group helping to implement an EU-coordinated push to improve research assessment will meet on 30 January to agree near-term priorities.

Launched in December 2022, the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment is helping to implement the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, which has four main commitments: recognising the diversity of research contributions, basing assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation, abandoning the “inappropriate” use of metrics and not using institutional rankings to assess researchers.

Rianne Letschert (pictured), chair of the Coara steering board, told Research Professional News this week that the coalition expects in the spring to launch a call for members to present “detailed” subjects for working groups based on the priorities, and that support processes for the groups should be agreed at the Brussels meeting.

Other near-term aims for Coara include stimulating discussion among its members and with stakeholders around the coalition’s plans and any concerns that arise, and developing a strategy for contacting and aligning with similar global initiatives.

Hopes and challenges

Letschert, who is president of Maastricht University in the Netherlands and chairs a Dutch assessment reform movement, said she hoped the commitments will be implemented within five years.

“It is a big dream but I honestly think that we can make this work,” she said, while admitting it is “not a given that it is all rosy”.

Her “biggest concern” is that reform will take too long and enthusiasm will wane. Letschert said she has seen in the Netherlands that people can get “impatient” with assessment reform as it is “a cultural change and not just changing a few features within the system”.

She added that younger generations were more likely to get impatient, with others afraid to change their behaviour and publication traditions.

The coalition already has more than 440 members, according to Letschert, but she said another big challenge is that they are predominantly in western Europe.

“If you look at eastern Europe, there is absolutely still work to do for the steering board to make sure that people feel included and want to be included and that it is not a western Europe dominated process.”

Need to reach out

Asked about criticism that member states will not directly be part of Coara, Letschert said the steering board needs to reach out to governments to convince them to back the reforms. She said it would be important to explain that the reforms will increase academic quality and societal impact, which should fit with government ambitions.

On Coara’s ability to implement reforms despite its voluntary and bottom-up approach, Letschert said she is not worried but acknowledged there is a “downside” to the fact that Coara “does not have a stick, it is all carrots”.

“We are not the Coara police that go to different countries and say you must check certain boxes,” she said.

The implementation of changes must be based on consultation, dialogue and consensus, according to Letschert.

“You will always have some forerunners and then there is a larger peloton that will follow,” she said. “That is okay, as long as we go in the right direction.”

Letschert said she was in Barcelona for Coara last week, where she talked about the plans with Spanish rectors and funders. There is already a long list of invitations from members asking the steering board to visit, she said.

“You [need to] hear people’s concerns. We really need to make sure we take time to discuss concerns with regards to how do you measure output in a qualitative way, what tools or instruments do we use, how do we make sure that these are objective, how do you take into account disciplinary differences? These kinds of discussions are necessary.”

The post Assessment reform coalition to select near-term priorities appeared first on Research Professional News.

Funding of billions of euros could eventually flow to institutions fostering young researchers

The European Commission is considering giving significant funding to institutions that provide secure career paths for researchers, as part of efforts to fix deep-rooted problems in the sector, a senior figure involved in the project has told Research Europe.

Portugal’s former science minister Manuel Heitor said a pilot initiative, expected next year, would respond to growing concerns about the precarious employment conditions many researchers face—particularly those at the start of their careers. The plans, which are in development, could eventually channel billions of euros to institutions that improve research careers, he said.

“We need a new incentive with a funding line devoted not to individuals, but to institutions,” said Heitor (pictured), who has been campaigning for better research career pathways.

He told Research Europe he has been working with the Commission’s research directorate to develop and test a public-private partnership under the EU’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme, focused on fostering research careers.

Its focus on institutions would set it apart from schemes aimed at junior researchers, such as the European Research Council (ERC) Starting Grants or Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions fellowships.

Heitor said it would be piloted with a provisional budget of €10 million for 2024-25, with a larger investment in 2027-28 and the goal of establishing a new programme in the successor to Horizon Europe starting in 2028.

“The idea is to start in the coming two years with a very small amount of money…then to evolve a new line of funding probably at the level of the ERC,” said Heitor. The ERC, launched in 2007 after years of development, has a budget of over €16 billion for 2021-27 under Horizon Europe.

The partnership would be co-funded by the Commission, national funding agencies and industry or public organisations.

Alongside funding for institutions, Heitor said he is working with the Commission on three related initiatives to be launched this year. The first is a ‘Research and Innovation Careers Observatory’, responding to the lack of data on Europe’s research workforce.

The second is developing a ‘European Framework for Research Careers’ with definitions for what constitutes a ‘good’ career path for young researchers. Heitor said this is a “difficult task” but a necessary one for rewarding institutions for good practice.

The third is adapting an existing, but little known, Commission scheme that awards research institutions for good practice in human resources. Heitor said this should become an annual award “for institutions which really take care of young researchers”. 

With the term of the current Commission leadership ending in 2024, Heitor said there is an urgency to the initiatives. “It needs to be done now,” he said, adding that plans have been discussed with member states and require the support of their governments. EU research commissioner Mariya Gabriel told MEPs on 24 January that the proposed partnership “will be a part of our strategic plan” for 2025-27. 

The Commission did not confirm any details when approached by Research Europe, but a Commission official said “our approach is to involve the whole research community…and have a constructive dialogue on how to take this work forward”.

“Knowing the importance to get all stakeholders on board, Commissioner Gabriel sees the need to pass to action,” they added.

The moves follow efforts by the research community to draw attention to poor working conditions for young researchers, which have been made worse during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Oleksandr Berezko, president of the European Council for Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers, said he welcomed Gabriel’s leadership in establishing better researcher career paths, “especially since dedicated funding is planned”.

Moniek Tromp, chair of the Young Academy of Europe, praised the Commission for “taking research careers seriously” and called for work pressure and mental health to be “embedded in any programme”.

But university representatives have raised concerns. Bert Overlaet from the League of European Research Universities (Leru) welcomed the prospect of new funding but warned over Commission efforts on defining ‘good career pathways’.

“So far these initiatives have only led to red tape and extra efforts from the institutions, costing resources that should and could have been used more beneficially,” Overlaet said.

Conditions for researchers are a consequence of the general “precariousness” of funding, he said, adding that Leru is “sceptical” the EU will allocate new funding in a way that alleviates the “real issues, which is pay for a decent living and social security coverage”.

This article also appeared in Research Europe and a version appeared in Research Fortnight

The post European Commission lines up measures to tackle problems with research careers appeared first on Research Professional News.

Well-matured bids will have a fuller flavour for reviewers

At the end of last year, the European Commission signed off on €13.5 billion in EU R&D spending for 2023-24.

A swathe of calls were opened by the bloc in December, addressing some of the biggest challenges facing the EU. The strand for food, bioeconomy, natural resources, agriculture and environment splits its calls into “destinations”, one of which is “fair, healthy and environment-friendly food systems from primary production to consumption”, or Farm to Fork, also the name of an EU strategy. The latest slate of calls under Farm to Fork closes on 12 April.

Christophe Courtin, a professor of food chemistry and biochemistry at KU Leuven in Belgium, won funding through a similar set of calls in 2021. He is now project coordinator for HealthFerm, a research project exploring the benefits of fermentation. Here, he shares his tips for winning funding.

What is HealthFerm?

The project explores fermented pulse- and cereal-based foods, as well as the health benefits of fermentation and public perceptions of novel fermented foods. It aims to enable an evidence-based transition in society and industry from traditional to sustainable plant-based fermented foods and diets that deliver health benefits to consumers.

Why is this work important?

There is an environmental aspect. We need to change at least part of our dietary pattern from animal-based to plant-based products. The issue is that functionality like gelling, foaming and structure formation is easier to achieve with animal-based proteins—think of milk or egg proteins. It’s much more difficult to achieve in the same way with plant-based proteins. We believe fermentation can help us achieve more functionality, more solubility of plant-based proteins.

Plus, there’s a significant fibre gap in our diets in the Western world and plant-based foods provide an opportunity to increase fibre in our diets.

How did HealthFerm start?

Originally, it was a small group of people interested in having an EU Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions training network. We applied and got a score of 95 per cent, which in any normal circumstance would mean you get a project, but we needed to reach 97 per cent. We resubmitted a few times with no luck and then focused on this call. The topic we applied for was “microbes for healthy and sustainable food and diets”.

Did you change your idea to fit the new call?

Yes. The topic for this project was fermentation, whereas for the Marie Skłodowska-Curie call we were looking more at cereal fibres.

How many groups are involved?

We have 23 partners—universities, research institutes, and small and large companies. The initial consortium for the European training network had six or seven participants. Then we expanded it based on the need for specific types of researchers, for example on the gut microbiome, on clinical trials and on consumer behaviour.

How much funding did you win?

We won €13.1 million through the Horizon Europe call, just over €11.3m from the EU, and €1.8m from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation that provided money for the Swiss partners. 

Explain the application process.

The application process was just one stage. You know which documents you have to supply, so in that sense it’s quite clear. But he call text itself mentions different elements you have to take into account, which is challenging. It is vital to adhere to as many of the elements mentioned in the call text as possible. For example, we had to incorporate consumer science but also define what a healthy gut microbiome is. We had to develop specific methodologies and had to link the project with several of the Commission’s new missions.

So, there’s the core of the scientific research, but there’s all those links to other aspects. Understanding the call text is half the success of a project.

Did you go through several application drafts?

Absolutely. The whole process of defining and writing the project took us six months. I think that was a factor in the success of this project—the fact that we spent so much time building the consortium and the project and writing new versions. 

Sometimes I hear that people who submit projects have only been working on them for about four to six weeks. I don’t see how it’s possible to get a grant like this in that time.

What advice would you give to others applying for similar calls?

Just that—prepare thoroughly. The more a project is discussed beforehand, the better it will score and the smoother it will run. 

Our application could not be more than 45 pages, which seems like a lot but is actually very little if you have to explain how you would impactfully spend €13.1m. At one point we were at 60 or 70 pages and had to reduce it to 45. But it’s better to write too broad and then narrow it down than not have sufficient substance to your text. 

I would also say that you have to be careful about who you invite to be a partner in the project, because once a person is invited it’s very difficult to uninvite them. If you decide after several months of discussion that you don’t need that partner, it’s too late. So, be very restrictive about who you invite in the first instance. 

This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact [email protected]

The post Let your bid ferment appeared first on Research Professional News.

Study urges European Commission and member states to improve funding for EUI alliances

The European Universities Initiative, the EU’s scheme for financing cross-border collaborations among higher education institutions, is operating in an “unsustainable” and “disjointed” way, a study has found.

Commissioned by the European Parliament’s Committee on Culture and Education, the study assessed the first years of the initiative, which launched in 2019. The EUI supports universities to form alliances around activities such as creating joint campuses and programmes, and there are now 44 alliances involving about 340 higher education institutions across the continent.

These alliances have so far been allocated a total of €357 million from two previous calls, while a third call closing this month is offering a further €387m for existing and new alliances. But all of this funding has been for short-term projects, and participating institutions have warned that it is insufficient for the ambitious long-term goals of the EUI.

The new study underscores those concerns, as well as further worries about the regulations underpinning the initiative.

Report findings

“The current operation model of the [EUI alliances] is unsustainable,” the study reported on 16 January. “This is due to high coordination costs not covered by the EUI funds, uncertainty about the continuation of the EUI, and the lack of regulatory and legal frameworks that match the EUI aspirations.”

“The current disjointed approach to addressing regulatory issues threatens to result in piecemeal, suboptimal solutions that still generate high transaction costs,” it added.

Under the initiative, the design of governance models is largely left to the alliances. This bottom-up process needs to be followed up by a more systemic approach, the study found.

For the alliances, the freedom they have “implies they have to deal with developing these structures on a daily basis”, according to the report. “Often, the newly created and complex governance structures turned out to be unfeasible in practice and had to be adapted several times.”

Recommendations

To counter this problem, the report recommends that EU member states and the European Parliament should consider placing a “high priority” on developing a regulatory framework that shapes the future collaboration of the alliances. Such a framework should focus on topics including research, innovation, community engagement, research integrity, open science and intellectual property rights, it said.

The current funding of the EUI alliances is “one of the biggest challenges” for their development, the report warned. The alliances are financed in part by the EU’s scheme for funding academic mobility, Erasmus+, but they must find additional funds from elsewhere to fully cover all their costs.

The uncertainty of long-term funding for the EUI alliances is another challenge, the report said, as many stakeholders expect the alliances to disappear if their support from Erasmus+ stops.

“To strengthen the [EUI alliances], the Commission and member states must urgently find ways to improve the financial position of the alliances,” the study said.

Official responds

A Commission official insisted to Research Professional News that the EU had put in place “a sustainable six-year Erasmus+ funding model” to support 60 alliances involving more than 500 higher education institutions.

They said this included “record investment” from Erasmus+ of €1.1 billion, for maximum funding per alliance of €14.4m and average funding per higher education institution of €1.6m.

The Commission will work with member state governments and stakeholders to develop a funding plan that takes into account regional, national and European resources, they said.

On regulatory issues, the official said the Commission strategy for universities presented a year ago “seeks to develop a genuinely European dimension, based on shared values, in the higher education sector”.

They added that member state governments had agreed recommendations “to facilitate deeper transnational cooperation between alliances of higher education institutions, such as European Universities, in a joint coherent way”.

“It is very encouraging to see that first results are already there with several countries already adapting or envisaging to adapt their national legislation accordingly,” they said.

“The Commission is working on new initiatives hand in hand with the higher education stakeholders and national authorities, to make transnational cooperation easier for the benefit of Europe’s students, higher education institutions, and their staff members.”

Update 25/1 – This article was updated with the comments from the Commission official.

The post European Universities Initiative ‘unsustainable’ and ‘disjointed’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Programme manager will lead work supporting major European initiative

The recently launched Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment is looking for a programme manager to lead its secretariat.

Coara, which was set up to implement an EU-coordinated agreement to improve research assessment, formally launched in December with the election of its chair—Rianne Letschert, president of Maastricht University in the Netherlands—and steering board members.

The European Science Foundation, a non-profit science promotion organisation, was appointed to provide the Coara secretariat, having been the only organisation to apply. It has now advertised for a programme manager to lead that work.

A vacancy description published by the ESF this week says that important responsibilities for the secretariat will include fundraising, budget management, coordination of coalition members and overseeing communications.

The programme manager will also work with key stakeholders including university managers, research organisations and evaluation agencies, to help them commit to and implement the agreement.

The deadline to apply for the position is 3 February.

The post Assessment reform coalition seeking head of secretariat appeared first on Research Professional News.

Three in 10 respondents said they had self-censored their academic views

Many higher education students in Europe have reported experiencing infringements of their academic freedom, according to a new survey by the European Students’ Union, which described the results as “shocking”.

The survey, which between May and September 2022 polled 645 students on academic freedom, institutional autonomy and academic integrity, reported that 12 per cent of respondents said they had been subjected to “intimidation” by staff because of what they studied.

Furthermore, 29 per cent said they had self-censored their academic views and 32 per cent said they feared consequences from their institution if they voiced their views.

“A shocking number of students said that they had already self-censored their views and were afraid of the consequences from their higher education institution if they expressed their personal beliefs,” the union reported on 12 January.

It warned: “Student academic freedom only truly exists if both knowledge gaining and knowledge sharing are possible without any constraints.”

The union said it hoped its report would prompt further research and debate on the role, experiences and views of students around academic freedom, institutional autonomy and academic integrity.

Respondents studied at institutions in 30 countries, although 78 per cent were at institutions in just five: Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary and Romania.

The union said its target threshold of 1,000 respondents was not reached and that the results were therefore not statistically significant, but that it thought the survey “still gives a valuable and unique insight”.

The post ‘Shocking’ results from survey of European student autonomy appeared first on Research Professional News.

The issues the research world will grapple with in 2023

Recent years have taught us that making predictions in January doesn’t often end well.

At the start of Januarys past, few people foresaw the Covid-19 pandemic or the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Both events were transformative for Europe and the rest of the world, and their impacts are still being felt, on research as well as elsewhere.

That said, there are developments for research that will almost certainly take place in 2023. Here, Research Europe takes a look at some of the most important changes currently on the cards for the sector—although we cannot promise wildcard events will not come along too.

Horizon Europe

Expect to hear a lot more about a coming wave of ‘association deals’ in 2023. Indeed, this wave has already started. Late last month, the Commission announced it had struck a deal with New Zealand on that country’s association to Horizon Europe.

The deal will be formally signed this year, giving researchers in New Zealand access to the seven-year, €95.5 billion framework—albeit only for Pillar II, which is focused on global challenges and industrial competitiveness, and not Pillar I grants from bodies such as the European Research Council.

The agreement still represents a milestone for EU R&I programmes, as none have been open to deals with such a geographically distant country before. After the success with New Zealand, the best bet for further movement will be on a deal with Canada in the spring.

Closer to home, the deadlock between the UK and EU that has prevented the former member state from associating to Horizon Europe looks set to come to a resolution after two years of limbo. But it remains to be seen whether ongoing disagreement over the Northern Ireland protocol can be fixed to unstick a deal, or if the UK government will instead choose to spend the money set aside for Horizon Europe association domestically.

Elsewhere, Switzerland is persevering with its domestic substitute for EU research funding, having also been shut out of Horizon Europe for the programme’s first two years.

Across Europe, the research sector remains exasperated that politicians have failed to set aside their broader differences to reach deals that would unlock R&I benefits for the whole continent.

Resolution of these issues seems deeply uncertain. But with more global Horizon Europe association deals likely to be sealed in 2023, the EU’s frostier relations with its nearer neighbours look increasingly untenable.

European Research Council

During her first year at the helm of the European Research Council in 2022, Maria Leptin claimed that the EU’s flagship research funder could have its budget doubled and still only be funding top-notch research, such is the calibre of applicants vying for its prestigious grants.

But an EU budget deal reached in November 2022 delivered the ERC a rather more modest increase of 2 per cent, up from €2.09bn last year to €2.13bn in 2023.

As well as missing out on a significant budget rise, the council is also having to deal with the continued freezing out of both the UK and Switzerland from EU R&D programmes, meaning the financial contributions they would have made are also missing.

The political logjam with the UK has already led the ERC to chop budgets for grants aimed at early career and intermediate researchers by 20 per cent in 2023 compared with 2022, when it was expecting UK contributions to its coffers.

Pressures on budgets and an efficiency drive from the European Commission have also led to concerns over staffing at the ERC, with former president Jean Pierre Bourguignon calling workloads “unreasonable”.

Following an EU-led push to reform research assessment, the ERC is also looking at tweaking its evaluation processes.

It has insisted there will be no departure from its focus on scientific excellence, but it has altered its evaluation processes so that researchers can highlight “exceptional contributions to the research community” and explain their career trajectories.

It seems locked in that, by the end of 2023, some aspects of how the ERC works could look quite different.

Assessment reform

At the end of last year, the long-awaited Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (Coara) officially launched.

Across the sector there has been speculation over what the coalition, which was created to bring about changes set out in the Agreement on Research Assessment Reform, will do to implement the goals of recognising the diversity of research roles and abandoning the “inappropriate” use of metrics.

There have already been some hints. Last year, Coara steering board member and Science Europe secretary general Lidia Borrell-Damián said the group will “inspire organisations” and “propose solutions” to the tricky problems around assessment.

The coalition may have its own tricky problems.

Coara steering board vice-chair Karen Stroobants has said that working groups tasked with carrying out the coalition’s activities will face several challenges. These include maintaining momentum after it received an initial groundswell of support, with 344 universities, institutes and funders immediately signing up. It is expected to grow even further in 2023.

Stroobants has also said that Coara will face difficulties in expanding its global reach and trying to keep its hundreds of members engaged.

Some organisations have expressed doubts over how Coara, which will be led by the president of Maastricht University in the Netherlands, Rianne Letschert, will function. Concerns include the potentially open-ended nature of its efforts and how it will work with national governments to bring about change.

Details of Coara’s pipeline of work will be released later this year. Supporters are betting that Coara rises to the challenges and proves its critics wrong.

Commission activities

The European Commission’s work programme for 2023, published in October last year, includes several new policy objectives related to research, innovation and higher education. The second quarter of this year is shaping up to be a busy few months as a result.

One of the objectives covers new genomic techniques, which we should expect to hear more about when the Commission puts forward a proposal for amending EU laws on the issue.

The Commission and leading scientists have previously indicated they think the EU’s decades-old genetics laws are no longer fit for purpose. This is because they lump the regulation of modern techniques like Crispr together with older, less-targeted methods of creating modified organisms.

The Commission will also present proposals on the compulsory licensing of patents at some point between April and June. Such licensing became a contentious subject globally during the pandemic.

Covid-19 vaccines were generally developed and produced in wealthier countries, which has led to a growing clamour among other nations for powers over the intellectual property deemed necessary to save lives. Finding a European consensus on the issue will take some work.

Elsewhere in the second quarter of 2023, the Commission will review how well the EU’s seven-year Multiannual Financial Framework budget system is functioning. This could please research organisations as several of them have called for the bloc’s R&I budget to be ringfenced to prevent governments seeking cuts to it every year.

A communication on an EU space strategy for security and defence, also scheduled for the busy April to June period, could likewise prove to be of interest.

Later in the year, a third-quarter Council recommendation on making it easier for young people to gain qualifications in different countries could be important for universities, as could third-quarter work on recognising the qualifications of people from outside the EU.

The Commission can normally be relied on to deliver on its work programme, so with all these slated for 2023 researchers would do well to keep an eye on what it comes up with.

Open access

European open-access advocates were cheered by news last summer that US president Joe Biden’s administration will in future require all federally funded research to be made “freely available and publicly accessible” immediately after its publication.

While the US policy will come into effect by the end of 2025, many hope the move will have global impacts given the US government is the world’s largest research funder.

The effects have already started to be felt in Europe. A copyright reform project called Knowledge Rights 21, which is backed by several academic organisations, drew inspiration from the US policy last year. Together with the Association of European Research Libraries (Liber) it is pushing national governments and the EU to introduce laws enabling immediate open access to papers that report publicly funded research.

Knowledge Rights 21 and Liber believe there should be laws establishing the right to republish publicly funded research in open-access repositories. There should be no embargo period with such rights, as is the case in some European countries that already have laws on the topic, the two groups say.

If more European countries and the EU establish these rights in law, it would be a major win for open-access advocates.

Turning to open data, a basic version of the European Open Science Cloud—an in-development, EU-backed online platform for sharing and analysing research data—is set to become operational later this year.

On being re-elected as president of EOSC for 2023-25, Karel Luyben said a “key challenge” will be the rollout and expansion of a basic version of the platform, called the Minimum Viable EOSC.

Meanwhile, Plan S, the open-access initiative set up in 2018 calling for all publicly funded research to be fully and immediately available, has already received a boost this year thanks to Switzerland’s national funder.

As of 1 January, the Swiss National Science Foundation requires all the research it funds to be published in Plan S-compliant open-access journals or platforms. Chances are there will be more news from Plan S in 2023.

European Universities Initiative

The 2023 call for the European Universities Initiative, the EU’s scheme for financing cross-border collaborations among higher education institutions, closed at the end of December. An announcement of the successful new alliances and the existing ones that received more funding will follow shortly.

Due to a record call budget of €384 million, the initiative—which helps universities to carry out collaborative work such as creating joint campuses, qualifications and posts—is set to go from strength to strength.

This year’s call will also bring the initiative closer to the target of supporting 60 alliances by mid-2024, involving over 500 higher education institutions. Currently, there are 44 EUI alliances involving 340 higher education institutions from the three earlier calls.

In a change from previous calls, the European Commission has said that countries in the Western Balkans will be allowed to become full partners in EUI alliances. Meanwhile, UK universities are no longer allowed to be full members in EUI alliances but can remain as associate partners, following the UK government’s decision to drop out of the EU’s Erasmus+ academic mobility programme, which funds the scheme.

Which universities chance their hand in new alliances, and which throw their lot in with existing ones under the latest call, remains to be seen.

Full schedule

Just a few weeks into 2023, it is already shaping up to be a busy year. There are plenty of dates to mark on our calendars, with more Horizon Europe association deals, reforms underway at the ERC and changes in the EUI all on the way.

One thing you can guarantee is that Research Europe will bring readers all the latest developments on these stories throughout the year, plus all you need to know on whatever curveballs the next 12 months throw. 

Swedish chair

This month, Sweden starts its six-month turn at chairing the EU-related activities of the bloc’s member state governments.

Within R&I, the presidency’s priorities are infrastructures, knowledge valorisation—the processes for deriving socioeconomic benefits from research results—and open science. There is continuity with the preceding Czech presidency on the first two priorities, with research ministers having adopted conclusions and recommendations for infrastructure and valorisation in December 2022.

The presidency said it would also work on the Chips Act, a major set of EU legislation intended to bolster the bloc’s ability to design and manufacture semiconductors.

Expect these aims to form a running theme over the next six months. 

A version of this article appeared in Research Europe

The post Guessing game: predictions for European research in 2023 appeared first on Research Professional News.

Reducing the risk of harassment in remote research environments

In 2022, the problem of harassment in isolated research environments caught the US scientific community’s attention and attracted mainstream interest.

Driving much of the discussion were two publications. The first was an article on the Buzzfeed News website in December 2021, which carried the testimony of 16 female scientists who had suffered sexual harassment and assault at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, a research station in Panama.

This was followed, in August 2022, by a report from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and its linked bodies, the Office of Polar Programs (OPP) and the United States Antarctic Program (Usap).

The report revealed widespread assault, harassment and stalking at Usap sites and during missions. It makes for harrowing reading. “Every woman I knew down there had an assault or harassment experience that had occurred on ice,” one interviewee said. 

The NSF and the National Science Board—which sets policy for the NSF—have both since responded with emergency actions for assault and harassment prevention in Usap.

In November 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy brought together senior scientists, agency officials and survivors of assault and harassment for an online roundtable to discuss a way forward. Of course, while it is misconduct at US-linked sites that has so far garnered headlines, the problem is more widespread.

Here are five takeaways from the roundtable discussion.

1. This is not just about fieldwork

“Isolated research environments can still exist in proximity to bustling campuses or large metropolitan areas,” Asmeret Berhe, the director of the office of science at the US Department of Energy, said. “[They] can come in many forms, wherever people might feel threatened or unsafe because of their identity, and when they can’t find others to seek help from.”

Ellen Stofan, undersecretary for science and research at the Smithsonian Institution, agreed, but added: “Remote fieldwork presents a risk we have to address head on.”

2. Effective systems to report harassment are vital

A key finding of the Antarctic report was that NSF bodies lacked adequate reporting and response systems. The first point of action in the NSF’s response to the report was to set one up with a single communication endpoint for all complaints. 

While having a single communication point is sensible, so that reports of harassment do not get lost in the system, Stofan added that there should be multiple ways to reach it. For the Smithsonian this now includes “a 24-hour reporting line so that anywhere in the world, at any time of day, someone can pick up a phone a report what’s happened”.

3. Training is essential

There was consensus among participants that good specialist training of all staff and supervisors who work in isolated research environments was not a magic bullet but was nonetheless essential. Training for those who may not be victims or perpetrators of harassment, but will become aware of it—bystander training—was deemed particularly crucial.

Training should be imbued with a sense of urgency. “We need to be training supervisors on how to have difficult conversations with people—not the 400th time but the first time [they suspect inappropriate behaviour],” Stofan said. “How does a supervisor, a community, enforce standards from the start, so these things don’t get to the level they do?”

4. Challenge power dynamics

When it came to addressing the wider cultural issues that enable harassment, there was broad consensus on the need to pluralise and flatten the linear and hierarchical power structures that exist in isolated research units—and within science generally.

In Stofan’s words, victims will often not report harassment “because they feel the harasser has power over their career and they fear retaliation”. This is often a legitimate fear. To deal with it, Stofan said, the Smithsonian had begun breaking up reporting lines so that there are at least two people for a staff member to turn to in the event of harassment.

5. Time to examine the complex issues around this topic

When director of the OPP Roberta Marinelli said what has emerged about harassment in isolated environments is only “the tip of the iceberg”, she clarified that the sector is starting to hear of “very highly visible, extraordinarily damaging activities that tend to make headlines and are often criminal in nature”.

There was a lot of assault and harassment happening “below the waterline”, Marinelli said, that was not immediately visible but was nonetheless extremely damaging. This included gender harassment and “conduct which is hostile, exclusionary”. This needed more attention, Marinelli urged. Especially as the perpetrators were often senior scientists and, thanks to their scientific renown, reputational assets to their employers.

“How do we make sure [they] don’t keep being recognised as leaders and keep getting funding?” Erika Marín-Spiotta, professor of geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, asked. This, the attendees felt, is an urgent question without an adequate answer. 

This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact [email protected]

The post Frozen out appeared first on Research Professional News.

National Technical University of Ukraine joins group amid hopes of its country entering the EU

The Cesaer group of over 50 European science and technology universities has welcomed its first Ukrainian member.

The National Technical University of Ukraine—Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute (KPI)—accepted Cesaer’s invitation to join the group amid Ukrainian hopes of becoming a member of the EU.

“Working together in Europe will ensure the fastest possible entry of our country into the EU with high standards of economic development and security, as well as advancing the contribution of education and science to building a new, more secure Europe together across the whole continent,” said KPI rector Mykhailo Zgurovsky.

Cesaer announced on 4 January that it had invited KPI to join the group back in October because of its “excellent science and technology research, education and innovation, and its leading position in Ukraine, Europe and beyond”. After accepting the invitation, KPI became a member of Cesaer on 1 January.

“The Putin regime’s war against Ukraine has indiscriminately attacked civilians, infrastructure and universities; just as with defence, the rebuilding of Ukraine will require support from the international community, and we look forward to working closely with KPI as it continues to play a vital role in securing Ukraine’s future,” said Cesaer president Rik Van de Walle.

The post European university group welcomes Ukrainian member appeared first on Research Professional News.

Study targeting “financing gap” preventing student access to education and training

The European Investment Bank has commissioned a study on student finance in the EU, with the aim of improving access to education in the bloc.

Technopolis, a consultancy that is part of the consortium carrying out the study, said an increasing number of students are needing to financially support their studies themselves, and that this leads to them “searching for financing solutions”.

“Recognising the need to improve the financing gap experienced by higher education students that is preventing them from access to education and training, the EIB has [asked the consortium] to analyse ways to incentivise more financial or non-financial institutions to provide financial solutions for students at better terms,” Technopolis said.

The consultancy said the study will map out the student financing market in EU member states and compare it with the UK and the US, which both offer student loans.

Two other consultancies, EY and T33, complete the consortium.

The post EU bank looks for ways to improve student financing appeared first on Research Professional News.

Scientific community “often insufficiently aware” of importance of diversity for research, academics say

Implicit biases and a lack of training on how to overcome them are reducing diversity in the scholarly peer review process, according to a survey of academics.

In a poll, audience members at a webinar on equity and accessibility in peer review said that barriers to achieving better inclusion include implicit biases in academia, a lack of diversity among editors and a lack of awareness and training.

During the webinar—hosted by the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities (Allea), the Global Young Academy and the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers—researchers highlighted that the scientific community often lacks knowledge of the importance of diversity.

“Importantly, the scientific community itself is often insufficiently aware of the criticality of diversity, even though there is a vast literature available about its importance for producing better research teams and outputs,” Allea said in a report summarising the November event.

“Creating further awareness among all groups involved in peer review will be crucial to promote meaningful change.”

Global north domination

The report pointed out that research is sill “largely dominated” by the global north and English-speaking countries, and said this means that unconscious biases are affecting aspects of research including opportunities to publish and peer-review scholarly work as well as funding and hiring decisions.

Given that publications are still “considered the main currency of academia”, biases in this area are also posing barriers to career progression for underrepresented groups including women, researchers from the global south, early career researchers and non-native English speakers, Allea said.

It added that there is insufficient data from publishers about diversity in scholarly peer review.

To increase diversity in peer review, Allea said it is “crucial to structurally rethink how we evaluate researchers and create the right incentives”.

The EU has coordinated a wider push to change the way researchers are assessed, which has resulted in the creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment.

The post ‘Bias and lack of training making peer review less diverse’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Open-access initiative set to focus on role of scholarly publishing as member of reform group

Coalition S—a group of mainly European research funders requiring work they have supported to be reported with open access—has joined the coalition working to help implement EU-backed reforms of research assessment.

As a member of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment, Coalition S will work with more than 300 other organisations collaborating to implement the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment. This agreement aims to better recognise the diversity of research roles, base assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation and abandon the “inappropriate” use of metrics.

Announcing its decision to join Coara on 15 December, Coalition S said it will focus on the role of scholarly publishing in the reform of research assessment.

It said this will include supporting the development of tools and processes to measure the merit of research outputs and helping to ensure that “all scholarly contributions to the publication process—including editorial services, assessments and peer review reports—are given proper and equal credit to the publications themselves and irrespective of whether they are formally published in a journal”.

Membership of Coara “naturally fits” with the aims and scope of Coalition S, the latter said, as its guiding principles say research should be assessed on its own merits rather than on where the research is published.

Coalition S members include research councils, academies and agencies from across Europe, such as the Academy of Finland, the National Science Centre of Poland, the Swiss National Science Foundation and UK Research and Innovation.

The post Coalition S joins EU-backed assessment reform push appeared first on Research Professional News.

Institutions could be ‘more self-confident’ say academics, while Commission pressured to take more action

European universities are being urged to be more proactive in safeguarding academic freedom in concert with efforts among some EU politicians to challenge the threats against it.

Last month, the European Parliament’s president, Roberta Metsola, promised that MEPs “will lead the fight” to better protect academic freedom in the EU, including via a new annual Academic Freedom Monitor.

MEP Christian Ehler said it should not be politicians who define what academic freedom is, and urged academic leaders to support the Parliament efforts.

Writing on 7 December for the university association Cesaer, Stefan Bengtsson, president of Sweden’s Chalmers University of Technology, and Dieter De Bruyn, senior policy adviser at Belgium’s Ghent University, agreed with Ehler.

“We believe there is a lot more that universities could do,” wrote Bengtsson and De Bruyn, pushing for universities to be “more self-confident on this matter”.

“If universities expect others to respond to those who threaten [academic freedom], they ought to safeguard it internally as maximally as possible,” they added.

Pressure on EU

At the same time, the EU has been urged to go further in its actions on academic freedom.

Writing for Research Professional News on 8 December, Kurt Deketelaere, secretary-general of the League of European Research Universities, said EU law “needs to provide better protection for academic freedom”.

He said the European Commission should make better use of the powers it has, warning that “it would be easy to be complacent” and that it is “unfortunate” the Commission “shies away from action when that freedom is in danger”.

While the EU has only limited competencies when it comes to education, it has much broader competencies in research, which Deketelaere urged the Commission to use to its advantage.

In addition, he said the EU “should be more vigorous in applying the international law it has signed up to” that protects academic freedom, and ideally update the bloc’s treaties to “insert clear protection”.

The post Universities ‘could do more’ to protect academic freedom in EU appeared first on Research Professional News.