ERC President Maria Leptin on Trust, Brain Drain, and Innovation in European Science
Overcoming the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the European Research Council (ERC) continues to champion curiosity-driven research, playing a pivotal role in advancing science across Europe. ERC President Maria Leptin highlighted the need to rebuild public trust in science, address brain drain in less advantaged regions, and prioritize fundamental research over short-term commercial gains. With innovative programs like the Proof of Concept scheme, the ERC is not only fostering groundbreaking discoveries but also unlocking their potential for real-world applications.
Just before the beginning of the World Science Forum in Budapest, we had the opportunity to sit down with Professor Maria Leptin, the President of the European Research Council (ERC), to discuss the ERC’s role, the state of European science, and her vision for the future.
ERC is perhaps the most prestigious EU funding body that supports cutting-edge research across the continent. Established in 2007 with the goal of funding the most ambitious and innovative research projects, regardless of field, the ERC provides grants to individual researchers, allowing them the freedom to explore new frontiers and pursue their most creative ideas. This focus on excellence and curiosity-driven research has allowed the ERC to support a wide range of disciplines, from cutting-edge physics and biology to groundbreaking work in the social sciences and humanities. As Professor Leptin emphasised: “The ERC is [still] very young, only 17 years old, and it has developed into a huge success in those years.”
ERC has had to navigate some significant challenges over the past three years, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the energy crisis which followed. “The pandemic was very difficult for the ERC because our success entirely relies on the evaluation process, which involves experts in our peer review panels having tough discussions and then interviews with the applicants,” she explains. “Moving these activities online during the pandemic period was challenging, and the “panels were very relieved to come back after the pandemic”.
On the other hand, the pandemic has accelerated ERC’s efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. They have shifted away from flying in interviewees, which is not only better for the environment but also more convenient for the applicants. Despite the disruptions, Leptin is quick to emphasise that, overall, these past three years at the helm of ERC have been a positive experience. She has enjoyed working with the staff and interacting with the ERC scientific council, and she has been thrilled to do things for the community.
The panel Leptin will be participating in at the World Science Forum is titled “Trust in Science”, which speaks to the growing concern around public trust in scientific findings and the scientific process. Leptin acknowledges that this is a complex issue without easy solutions.
“Many people do trust scientific results and rely on them, and are interested in understanding the way science works, so we mustn’t forget that,” she says. The trouble is that scientists are not always clear about the fact that mistakes can happen, and our knowledge is not perfect. “Scientists make mistakes just like anybody else, but the good thing about science is that those mistakes get corrected.” But the scientific community needs to be more transparent about these uncertainties and the iterative nature of the scientific method. As Leptin acknowledges, however, the scientific community has not always done a good job of communicating the nuances of its work.
Regarding scientists’ participation in public life, Leptin cautions against a patronising approach: “If scientists approach the public with an attitude of ‘I’m a scientist, let me explain to you how things work’, that’s patronising and condescending,” she notes. Instead, she advocates for meaningful public engagement: “If it is engaging people, trying to understand where people have concerns and working with them, that’s fantastic.” She highlights successful examples of public engagement: “The ERC has a prize for grantees who engage with the public, not preach, but work with the public, whether it’s schoolchildren who collect insects for them to do population biology or whether it’s all citizens who measure the degree of sunlight throughout the entire country with their cell phones and then look at the data.”
One persistent challenge facing European science overall is the “brain drain” of top talent from poorer, “widening countries” being drawn to opportunities on the Western side of the continent. Leptin acknowledges that this is a complex problem without easy solutions, but she highlights some of ERC’s efforts to address it. “There are two activities the ERC does to help people in countries where there isn’t so much of a supportive structure,” Leptin explains. “One is visiting fellowships for people to go to work in the research groups of grantees who are experts in the field. And the other is mentoring for people who are actually preparing grant proposals.”
However, Leptin emphasises that the primary responsibility for retaining and attracting talent lies with the member countries themselves. “You can't expect a top-level researcher to work in a country where there’s no career structure, no infrastructure, no funding.” The countries that host scientists have to do their part by investing in their research ecosystems. She points to the successes of countries like Estonia, Slovenia, Poland, and Czechia, which have recognised the importance of supporting their scientific communities and have seen an increase in strong ERC grant applications as a result.
“Wherever these kinds of investments and support structures are in place, we’re seeing an increase in good applications and eventually an increase in grants,” she points out. Some of the work being done within the research communities in these widening countries is particularly encouraging. “In Czechia, for example, the ERC grantees and panel members get together to advise their colleagues on how to develop successful grant applications.” This kind of peer-to-peer mentoring and community-building can be incredibly valuable in helping to nurture the next generation of scientific leaders.
Leptin is particularly concerned about the tendency for governments to prioritise applied, commercially-oriented research over fundamental, curiosity-driven science. “It’s so shortsighted,” she says. “You can’t have a country say, ‘Let the others do the fundamental research, we’ll just do the exploitation.’ You need researchers who understand fundamental research, who can interpret new findings and recognise their potential for innovation.” Countries need to invest in their own fundamental research capabilities in order to develop the talent and expertise necessary to capitalise on scientific breakthroughs. “There’s no point in waiting until everybody is talking about it. You have to be at the forefront to recognise the potential for innovation. How do you train people to recognise the potential for innovation? You have to train them in research labs, doing fundamental research themselves.”
ERC is also constantly innovating, and one of its newer initiatives is the Proof of Concept scheme, which provides additional funding to grantees to help them explore the commercial potential of their research. Leptin is encouraged by the early results of this program, and also points to ERC’s track record as evidence of the crucial role that basic research plays in driving innovation and progress. “Even though ERC grants are not selected based on innovation or application, 40% of our funded projects generate data that are cited in patents,” she says. The majority of applicants to the European Innovation Council’s transition grants also come from the pool of ERC grantees, which is a testament to the commercial potential of the research the ERC supports.
Cover photo credit: erc.europa.eu