In recent years the issue of the small number of women working in science has shifted from being seen as one of social justice to one of economic sense — that in societies increasingly demanding a skilled technical workforce we need to stop squandering half of our scientific potential. So the drawing together by the European Commission last week (see page 202) of a so-called ‘network of networks’ of women-in-science groups to form an assemblage large enough, and with enough tentacles, to apply pressure in many of the right places around Europe was a timely idea.

In some places, the women-in-science lobby is already showing the effectiveness of carefully coordinated campaigns; witness, for example, its impact during the recent World Conference on Science, in Budapest. In the United States, the Association for Women in Science (AWIS) has achieved the creation of a Congress-mandated Commission on Women and Minorities in Science and Technology; AWIS's eight-year campaign has produced a body that will seek to collect examples of effective strategies for recruiting, retaining and advancing women in science.

Last week's Declaration of Networks Active in Europe sets out ambitious recommendations, its pan-European agenda having its sights firmly set on the political process, arguing for the need for strategic action, lobbying and advocacy. Nevertheless, a notable absence at the commission's meeting was any emergence of a Europe-based leadership from among the networks. Catherine Jay Didion, the executive director of AWIS, keynote speaker at the meeting and one of those behind the US commission, exemplifies the type of figure that is urgently required at a European level. Such people are needed to win friends and backers within the science community and to lobby at a political level. A strong figurehead can also gain broader support from the public. The emergence of strong leaders within the women-in-science lobby in the United States and United Kingdom has led to enhanced political clout in those countries.

It is unclear how the issue of women in science will fare in the medium term inside the European Commission. The topic is currently one of considerable activity, following its jump-start last year by the then research commissioner, Edith Cresson. But little is known of the priorities of the proposed new commissioner, physicist Philippe Busquin (see page 203). Given the current momentum behind efforts by the commission on the issue of women in science, this would be an appropriate topic to be pursued by the European Parliament at its hearings on his candidacy later this year.

The recognition of the network of networks is an important step forward for both European science and women scientists. Science needs the best scientists, and that can only be attained by realizing the full potential of women. But although the commission's first priority might be to use the network to raise the numbers of women in expert advisory panels in the fifth Framework programme of research, it knows that only a small fraction of research spending comes through this route. If the commission is intent on encouraging women in science, it should also seek to stimulate new standards in the national programmes of EU member states.