The European Life Scientist Organization (ELSO) has launched a petition for life scientists to “tell the European Commission what's wrong with the Framework Programme.” The petition is accompanied by an editorial and feature article in the latest edition of the ELSO Gazette, containing scathing criticisms of the current Sixth Framework Programme (FP6), the main source of centralized funding for research in Europe.

“There are many serious faults with the whole concept and foundation of the Framework Programmes,” says the editorial. “The first step [toward change] is to convince the people in charge—the staff of the Commission and the members of the European Parliament—that there is a problem... They will understand if we can get them to listen and if we speak clearly enough.”

“The European Commission's science funding is so bogged down in baroque application procedures, concerns about management, accounting, training, technology transfer, reporting, contract negotiation, etc. that the research itself takes a back seat…” adds Bart de Strooper, of the Flanders Interuniversity Institute for Biotechnology, in his article in the same issue.

ELSO perceives three key problems that have driven them to launch the petition. First, they say the “low trust” mode of funding research through complex contracts rather than straightforward grants leaves researchers swamped by the bureaucracy. Second is the requirement for a level of transnational collaboration that ELSO feels hinders rather than promotes effective research. The third problem is the strict focus on applications and international competitiveness, which ELSO says is “precluding the funding of 'basic' research.”

Bart de Strooper presents a detailed argument, making the case that “the way science is managed from Brussels [involves] window dressing, bureaucracy, a lack of transparency [and] money and time lost in useless administration.” His solution, in short, is that “Europe must copy... the examples of successful research-funding structures in the USA.”

The petition calls for “a new and ambitious European Science policy,” and invites signatories to also submit their comments and suggestions. The list of signatures and their input will be presented to the European Commission and the European Parliament in Autumn 2004, in the hope of influencing the structure of the next Framework Programme, due to begin in 2007.

The reaction from prominent scientists contacted by The Scientist for comment on this and related issues suggests the petition may gain wide support.

“Everybody would like to see the Framework Programme altered [by] moving from contracts to grants,” Julio Celis, president of the European Life Sciences Forum, told The Scientist. “Even the commission now wants that,” he added, “but it will need a revolution in the way it works.” Celis said he is confident that the commission is ready to listen and that there is real hope for significant changes along the lines the scientists are calling for.

“Europe's official science policy is an insult to the enormous scientific potential of the European science community,” Gottfried Schatz, former president of the Swiss Science and Technology Council told The Scientist. “It stresses political and economic goals at the expense of excellence and creativity, does very little for our young researchers, and furthers the politically astute rather than the original thinkers... Europe badly needs a science funding body that is conceived and run by scientists and that funds long-term basic research purely based on scientific merit.”

The initial response from the European Commission has been to welcome constructive criticism while rebutting some of ELSO's claims.

“We of course welcome all and every contribution to the debate on how to promote science and technology in Europe,” Fabio Fabbi, research commissioner Philippe Busquin's spokesman, told The Scientist. “We constantly consult research stakeholders across Europe, and we listen to constructive criticism with a view to further improving EU performance in this field.”

“But ELSO provides a mixed message: attacking Framework Programme 'red tape' while at the same time calling for initiatives the EU has already launched,” he said. The European Commission's director general of research, Achilleas Mitsos, recently outlined proposals for significant changes to the way science is funded in the European Union.

Fabbi said the commission looks forward to working with the scientific community to make EU research policy and the Framework Programme more effective. “At the same time, it's up to EU member states, industry, and the scientific community itself to do more to turn Europe into a real global scientific and technological powerhouse... We are confident things can and will improve.”