{"id":1027,"date":"2018-05-09T11:59:12","date_gmt":"2018-05-09T09:59:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.mariolopoulosfoundation.gr\/?page_id=1027"},"modified":"2026-07-15T12:39:13","modified_gmt":"2026-07-15T10:39:13","slug":"announcements","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/mariolopoulosfoundation.gr\/?page_id=1027&lang=en","title":{"rendered":"Announcements"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Science and policy: Issues of framing, authority, evidence and political-economic decision making<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Report of the Round Table held in the EU Parliament, Brussels, 24 March 2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Links:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Programme and slide presentations<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In order to create clarity about the complex relationship between science and policy, ENSSER held a Round Table with members of the European Parliament, representatives of the European Commission, scientists and others. The report of our conference about the same topic, held in Athens in May 2025, was presented and discussed at the Round Table.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This report specifically states, first, that academic science, due to current funding channels, has become dominated by industrial corporations. Further, official scientific advisors to governments are often closely aligned with the same corporations. This has led to an undemocratic influence of these corporations on politics, which is one of the root causes of the many current environmental and health crises. It has also led to a neglect of the Precautionary Principle, which is essential to the protection of public health and the environment. The report makes detailed recommendations to improve the relationship between science and policy, the most important of which is a considerable upscaling of public funding for basic and public-good-oriented research. Another important recommendation is that risk assessment policies (RAPs), with their underlying assumptions, are made explicit and decided in accountable ways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After three ENSSER members summarised the Athens report in three presentations – the past, present and potential future of the topic -, members of three different political groups of the European Parliament reacted to ENSSER’s report. Michal Wiezik of the Renew group stressed that EU legislation is often shaped by considerations that lack factual accuracy but serve the interests of various industrial sectors. He finds it deeply troubling that policy decisions are significantly influenced by competing interests instead of by a peer review process. Manuela Ripa of the EPP group stated that the gap between scientific evidence and political action is a real risk and that independent scientific expertise must be systematically and systemically integrated into decision-making. Martin H\u00e4usling of the Greens\/EFA Group said that the heavy reliance on third-party funding in European science poses a risk, and that it is important to support independent research into high-risk technologies with public funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Watch the remarks by the President of the MKI, Mr. C. Zerefos, at the link below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n