DUBLIN—A sense of cautious optimism about the future of science funding in the European Union has emerged from a meeting held here over the past 2 days.

With the support of the European Commission, the Irish government—as the current holder of the EU presidency—assembled the symposium of politicians, industry leaders, and high-placed members of the scientific community. The aim was to draw a consensus about the state of European basic science and whether new EU action was needed.

Representatives of 27 countries—current EU members, accession states, and allied countries—unanimously approved a set of conclusions that acknowledged a need to create a more attractive basic research environment.

The delegates agreed that a new European arrangement was required and urged the commission “to bring forward to the Competitiveness Council proposals for the governance, management, and accountability of a European initiative.”

It should be characterized by minimum bureaucracy and closely involve the scientific and engineering communities, they said.

Europe's Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin and Director-General of Research Achilleas Mitsos were both present at the meeting and spoke about the important place of science.

Talk about research in the European Union has tended to put the cart before the horse, Mitsos said, by focusing too much on new structures, such as the proposed European Research Council, rather than asking what those structures might actually do.

“This symposium is a great success in that regard,” he said. “You have managed to have a discussion in that order.”

Afterward, Irish Deputy Prime Minister Mary Harney told reporters, “The efforts over the past 2 days will not be wasted.” The conclusions will have an important input into the EU's Competitiveness Council, which will meet on March 15, she said.

Last week (February 11), the European Commission made proposals regarding financial perspectives of research, suggesting an increase in the portion of funds allocated to research. That would see a rise from the current level of about €5 billion up to €12 billion in the next funding period, from 2007–2013, Mitsos said.

In coming months, the commission will also make an overall proposal for boosting research excellence at the EU level. That proposal, he said, will insist that “the only community that will have something to do with setting the research agenda in basic science will be the scientific one.”

The idea is to stimulate competition at a regional level. Unlike most EU funding currently available, the existence of an international collaboration will not be a precondition for support in that new scheme. Neither would any other EU priorities, such as cohesion, integration of acceding countries, age or gender, be a factor in assessing projects. Scientific excellence alone would be the criterion, he said, and peer review the only way to determine that excellence.

“The keyword is the sense of ownership the scientific community must have,” Mitsos said. “We must create an agency that is credible to the scientific community.” Of course, he stressed, all this needs to be approved by the European Parliament and Council, too.

Nobel Laureate Tim Hunt, from Cancer Research UK, told The Scientist he felt the pull of a “sea change” in the European Union's attitude toward basic science. Crucially, he was encouraged by proposed changes to the conditions under which money is given by the European Union—from the current contract system to one using project grants. This would reduce significantly the amount of bureaucracy involved.

“It is the simple fact that [currently] we are asked to participate in the cost of the project,” Mitsos said. “Somehow, we must have proof of what the cost of the project is. That is what we have to change… We have to move toward grants.”

The commission's aim is to put forward a proposal that is likely to be approved by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers, he said, but some of the new proposals will be “a difficult task.”