strasbourg

The science ministers of Austria and Germany are supporting a bid by the European Science Foundation (ESF) to become a formal adviser to the European Commission on research issues.

At the same time, however, tensions have arisen between the ESF and the heads of the national research councils of the European Union (EU) — who meet regularly as a group known as Eurohorcs — over the amount of direct influence that the research councils should, through Eurohorcs, have within the ESF.

ESF's main activities include supporting European research networks and conferences and coordinating reports on issues such as the future needs of European researchers for synchrotron radiation or neutron sources (see Nature 396, 4; 1998).

Under pressure from its 62 member organizations, from 21 European states, to expand its remit to include activities not undertaken in the European Commission's framework research programmes, the ESF has in recent years developed interests in research policy.

Two years ago, for example, it presented a detailed report to the commission on a proposed scientific agenda for Europe, prepared for the debate on the content of the fifth Framework research programme (Nature 382, 8; 1996).

Casper Einem, the Austrian research minister, told the ESF annual assembly in Strasbourg last week that its unique constitution as a federation of academies of sciences and research councils made the foundation a suitable body to “take up European tasks such as evaluating European [research] programmes and being consulted on all science policy questions”.

Reinhard Grunwald, secretary-general of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the German university grant-giving body, told the assembly that the new German minister of research, Edelgard Bulmahn, also believed that the ESF should have a formal advisory role to the EU.

Grunwald said that this might be done through the European Research Forum, the commission's new top-level research advisory committee (see Nature 393, 502; 1998). Bulmahn will put this on the agenda of the regular EU research ministers' meeting when Germany takes on the EU presidency in January.

Meanwhile, however, questions are being raised about the extent to which the foundation can simultaneously serve the interests of its “intellectual stakeholders” — the grassroots scientific community — and its “financial stakeholders”, namely its member organizations, including in particular those belonging to Eurohorcs.

In contrast to the ESF, Eurohorcs has no secretariat or executive. Indeed, it takes pride in the informality of its loose organization. The group meets twice a year, primarily to discuss shared problems.

Despite the lack of a formal structure, Eurohorcs is keen to have a stronger voice in European-level science policy decisions. Aware that its councils provide most of the ESF's funding, it has been pressing the ESF to act in a more defined way as the executive — and voice — of Eurohorcs.

Brooks: wants role in Strasbourg body. Credit: EPSRC

At last week's assembly meeting, for example, Richard Brook, head of the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, and chair of Eurohorcs, called for a clear relationship with Eurohorcs to be written into the ESF statutes. “We need defined links that everyone can understand,” he said.

But ESF general secretary Enric Banda points out that such a formal relationship can only be incorporated into the foundation's statutes if Eurohorcs were to become a legal entity.

Not all Eurohorcs members want this. “We should remain an informal organization,” Grunwald told the assembly. Unlike Brook, Grunwald wants the relationship between the ESF and Eurohorcs to “be maintained more through mutual trust than institutional links”.

Banda is frustrated by what he sees as a lack of clarity in the demands of some Eurohorcs members and their vague but frequently articulated mistrust of the ESF.

Banda says he would welcome closer cooperation with Eurohorcs, “But the ball is their court”. He points out that Eurohorcs “has it in its power to take over the ESF by dominating the executive council, which is made up of representatives of member organizations”.