What role for civil society in research?

Although there are a lot of concerns about the funding distribution in FP7, especially with regard to health, the other face of the debate focuses on the "war of evidence". How is defined sound and authoritative evidence? And what could be the contribution of civil society towards a better determination and dissemination of scientific data?

Role of civil society in FP7

According to the European Commission, within each theme of the new FP7 (Cooperation, Ideas, People and Capacities. ), civil society has the opportunity to input.

5 different ways of being involved in research could be mentioned:

1. Observers: NGOs do get information and are consulted;

2. Participation in evaluating projects: Civil society organisations could bring their expertise and evaluate the proposals according to their need and expectations;

3. Discussing the research agenda: It should be noted that this method has not be widely used by the European Commission. Despite the general consultation ( July - October 2004), launched by the European Commission for FP7, the scientific community and civil society organisations were not treated as major players in the consultation process.

4. Undertaking research

5. Commissioning research: This option is open to small and medium enterprises since FP4 and the European Commission currently works to extend it to civil society.

Missing issues and concerns

Science is meant to improve knowledge, information, economics, politics and society, in order to help implement evidence-based policy-making. People think that science will make their life healthier, help to cure illnesses such as AIDS, cancer, etc. However, the social dimension is often forgotten.

Besides, applications and technologies derived from scientific discoveries shape our every-day lives and our ethical views. Prioritising science is therefore based on a political choice. It is worth noting for example that research on sustainable development is rarely mentioned. Moral and ethic issues should be also given more weight.

Furthermore, the public involvement in the setting process of FP7 could contribute to improve its outcomes. The fact that civil society participation is an instrument for better decision-making should be more adopted in FP7 as the participatory governance involving citizens and their organisations is needed. Besides, it would therefore contribute to the European Commission’s goals of better communication and better law-making. Participatory processes should be linked with decision-making. In reality, the public opinion is mainly ignored. Recent serveys show that the public want their voices to be taken into account in scientific policy making and decision taking.

The last point of concern focuses on themes and wording of FP7: Strikingly, words such as dialogue, civil society and democracy are very rare in the text. Public health is mentioned twice (compared with biotechnology: 18 times). Claudia Neubauer - Fondation Science Citoyenne - argues as well about the strong influence of industry terminology in FP7.

Moreover, there are no specific instruments to support the organisations representing the civil society in FP7. Although they may not have the capacity or the expertise to undertake research on their own, NGOs could bring added-value with their consistent reports and a civil society perspective. For Claudia Neubauer, it should be an obligation to take an NGO partner within each research project.

EPHA’s activities - the SPHERE project

EPHA is a partner of the SPHERE project (Strengthening Public Health Research in Europe), led by the Faculty of Public Health of the Royal College of Physicians of the United Kingdom .

The SPHERE study aims to prodive guidance on how the public health research can be strengthened and effectively integrate with European health policy. It will also contribute to developing the public health research within the Seventh Framework Research Programme.

EPHA’s role in the project will particularly look at collecting civil society organisations’ views using its broad membership, so at to help develop an expert knowledge base for guidance on public health policy.

The role of the civil society in research was also discussed during a seminar at the EPHA Extraordinary General Assembly on 13 December 2005. Presentations from DG Research, Claudia Neubauer and the SPHERE project can be downloaded.