GeoLog

Uncategorized

GeoPolicy: Horizon Geoscience!

GeoPolicy: Horizon Geoscience!

For the last few months the EGU has been working towards both hosting a dinner debate in Brussels, Belgium, and publishing the Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey Report which was based on a survey conducted within the geoscience community earlier this year. Both of these endeavours were undertaken together with the European Federation of Geologists (EFG) and had similar aims: to enhance collaboration between policymakers and scientists and to improve the geoscience community’s science-policy engagement.

Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey Report – key findings

Earlier this year, the EGU together with the EFG, conducted the Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey to collect feedback on areas of the EU’s Horizon 2020 research funding programme that the geoscience community felt should be continued or extended and those which could be improved upon in the upcoming EU research framework programme, Horizon Europe.

This survey was conducted during the 2018 EGU General Assembly and many of you may remember either completing it or seeing posters around the convention centre advertising the opportunity.

Does this look familiar? Advertisement for the Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey

Due to its thematic diversity and its size, the geoscience community has a significant representation within European research programmes. The survey aimed to give researchers who have taken part in Horizon 2020, or who plan to take part in Horizon Europe, the opportunity to voice their opinion.

Although the survey asked a wide variety of questions, only those where clear results were found were included in the Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey Report. However, all of the survey responses (quantitative and qualitative) can be seen online here. Qualitative responses supported by the quantitative answers and cited by numerous survey respondents were also included in the report and give insight into some of the answers from respondents.

The full report was publicly released during the Horizon Geoscience dinner debate (which is summarised below) along with a more condensed 2-page summary. Some of the key results that are outlined in detail in the report include:

    1. 1. Generally, survey respondents felt very positively about the impact that the Horizon 2020 Programme had on collaboration (both across EU countries and between scientific disciplines)

 

 

    1. 2. Despite many areas within the geosciences being used by the private sector, survey respondents generally felt that Horizon 2020 had only been moderately successful in generating private sector investment within the geosciences. 48% of respondents believed that the programme was somewhat generating private sector investment, but only 6% thought it was generating it to a large extent.

    3. 24% of respondents thought that the distribution of projects between applied and fundamental research was not fair at all.

For more details on these results and others, please read the full Horizon 2020 Geoscience Survey Report.

Horizon Geoscience: overcoming societal challenges, creating change

The Horizon Geoscience dinner debate was held on the evening of September 26 in Brussels. Co-organised by the EFG, the event included a mix of scientists, industry leaders and policymakers from a range of different areas within the Commission.

Panel members during the Horizon Geoscience dinner debate. From Left to right: Jonathan Bamber, John Ludden Lieve Weirinck, Jean-Eric Paquet and Vitor Correia

The evening was opened by both the EGU President Jonathan Bamber and the EFG President Vitor Correia. As EGU’s policy officer, I presented some of the key results from the Horizon Geoscience Survey, after which Iain Stewart set the scene for the evening.

One of the highlights of the evening was the high-level panel session which gave the evening’s participant’s the opportunity to hear from respected representatives from the EU Parliament, EU Commission, and geoscience community, namely:

  • Lieve Wierinck, Belgian Member of the European Parliament,
  • Jean-Eric Paquet, Director-General at the European Commission’s DG for Research & Innovation
  • John Ludden, British Geological Survey Chief Executive

The round-table discussions that were held during dinner also sparked a lively debate and highlighted things that need to be addressed to tackle societal challenges

Some of the key things that were mentioned during these round-table discussions included the importance of increasing public trust in both science and policymaking, the need for greater dialogue between the sectors, and the need to integrate early career scientists within industry, academia and policy.

For an extensive summary of the dinner debate please see the EGU news item, EGU and EFG establish dialogue with policy makers on how the geosciences can help overcome Europe’s major societal challenges.

If you have any questions regarding the report of the Horizon Geoscience dinner debate, please don’t hesitate to get in touch via policy@egu.eu.

GeoPolicy: What does working at the European Environment Agency look like? An interview with Petra Fagerholm

GeoPolicy: What does working at the European Environment Agency look like? An interview with Petra Fagerholm

This blog post features an interview with Petra Fagerholm who is currently leading the team on public relations and outreach in the communications department of the European Environment Agency (EEA). Petra gave a presentation about the EEA during the Science for Policy short course at the 2018 EGU General Assembly. In this interview, Petra describes her career path, what it is like to work at the EEA and provides some tips to scientists who are interested in a career in an EU institution or who would like to share their research with policymakers.

Could you start by introducing yourself and the European Environment Agency (EEA)

My name is Petra Fagerholm, I have worked at the European Environment Agency (EEA) in Copenhagen for 14 years. Currently, I am leading the team on public relations and outreach in the Communications department.

The EEA is an EU agency, which was set up in 1993 to inform the policymakers and the citizens about the status of the environment and to contribute to sustainable development. In addition to the headquarters, a ministerial level expert network across Europe was also established. This network is called “Eionet” and it ensures dataflows for reporting and quality consistency of the assessments we produce.

How does the EEA use science and research?

Experts at the EEA use science and research material when producing reports, briefings and assessments. The EEA translates science into tailor-made knowledge needed for policymaking at a European level.

How did you become the Head of Group for Public Relations and Outreach at the EEA?

I studied Biology at the University of Helsinki, in Finland, where I come from. My University pathway was far away from communication and environment. After a year of exchange at the University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland, I became really interested in human physiology and subsequently I graduated a couple of years later from the University of Strasbourg with a French DEA degree in Neurosciences. I was part of the research group on visual psychophysics when Finland became a member in the EU. Finnish politicians were hiring assistants and out of curiosity (and being young… and fearless…), I applied and got the job. I think the drive for change came from the fact that I felt my research topics and hypothesis were very difficult to solve and funding was hard to get in the area of fundamental life sciences research. I aspired to be part of the new “European Project” for Finland.

After my job at the European Parliament, I was lucky to be recruited on a short-term contract at the European Commission as Scientific Officer in the area of Neurosciences. After a break of 1 year during which I was pregnant with my daughter, I worked for 2 years at Merrill Lynch Investment Bank in London. During that period, I came across the announcement for recruiting new staff at the EEA.

At the EEA, I started at the Executive Director’s office working on strategic coordination and on several short-term projects in the field of sustainability. I have always been keen to lead and support others in their career. I lead the support team in that office for 8 years. After 11 years in total in the director’s office, I was ready to change career and was lucky to be transferred to the communications department. My new tasks were to develop stakeholder approaches to support the communication framework at the EEA and continue to lead the team of outreach.

My career path is far from a straight line. I have more often let my heart lead rather than my head on career decisions. People I have met over the years, or more precisely bosses I have had, have helped by always giving me a sense of freedom in my tasks, trusting and believing in me. I have avoided staying in a job where I did not feel my skills were valued.

What is your average day like in the EEA office?

An average day is when I interact across the organisation with experts seeking their input or advice into a stakeholder project I am doing. It can be either enquiring about stakeholder consultations of a report published or developing a programme for a visiting group coming to the EEA. I catch up with everyone in my team on a daily basis to sense if everything is ok. My boss is easily approachable and I speak to her every day.

Twice a month I organise a strategic communication meeting for the Communication colleagues where we share information on production, launches, press, speeches and project across the EEA. Sometimes I receive a visiting group from a university or a ministry. People from across the world contact us to ask for a visit. Usually I kick off the programme by giving a presentation about the EEA after which I am joined by a couple of experts on a specific topic that the visitors are interested in.

What do you enjoy most about your job?

I like to lead a team and see how the members complement each other’s competences.  Allowing each team member to use their full potential and develop new skills is rewarding to me.

Working in a European body and for the environment feels good. I believe the EU is the biggest peace project in the world.

What do you find most challenging about your job?

I find it challenging when it is difficult to measure the real and tangible impact of outreach or communication. It is also sometimes difficult to prioritise activities and to work within the limited resources we have available.

Sometimes we cannot avoid influences from geopolitical storms – it is hard. Europe is about working together and building bridges for everyone.

What advice would you give to a researcher who is interested in a career with the EEA or the EU more broadly?

  • Firstly, you have to be an EU national to apply to the EU institutions. At the EEA, we have 33-member countries and you have to be citizen of one of these.

    Map of the 33-member countries

  • If you see an interesting job advertised in the EU institutions or EEA, apply as many times as you want.
  • Do not give up.
  • Keep your CV updated.
  • Follow EU politics.
  • Read up on EU affairs – it will make a difference in the interview.
  • Apply for jobs in national ministries or institutions – it can sometimes be a gateway to finding a short-term contract as a seconded national expert in the EU or at EEA. Look for a job in an EU lobby organisation who could benefit from your specific research.
  • Apply for the EU Blue Book traineeships https://ec.europa.eu/stages/
  • Register to EPSO – the EU portal for jobs: https://epso.europa.eu/apply/job-offers_en

Do you have any advice for scientists wanting to communicate their research with policymakers?

Less is more. Policymakers will find your research useful if you have concrete examples on how to contribute or solve some of the challenges a policymaker faces.

Use easily understandable language in your communication material. One A4 page is a good length for anything.

Is there anything else you’d like to say or comment on?

Surround yourself every day with people who are positive and who give you energy and pull you up. Believe in yourself and in your passion for what you do. Be proud of the choices you have made and trust in those you will make. There is a reason for everything.

Editor’s Note: since this interview took place, Petra has changed positions within the European Environment Agency and  is currently working as a stakeholder relations expert 

 

Geopolicy: Combating plastic pollution – research, engagement and the EU Plastic Strategy

Geopolicy: Combating plastic pollution – research, engagement and the EU Plastic Strategy

Awareness around the prevalence of plastic pollution, particularly in our oceans, has been growing over the last few years. This is not surprising considering that plastic production has surged from 15 million tonnes in 1964 to 311 million tonnes in 2014 and models have shown that this number will double again within the next 20 years in a business as usual scenario. Furthermore, research conducted by the European Commission estimated that Europeans generate a combined 25 million tonnes of plastic waste annually with less than 30% being collected for recycling.

All this sounds quite overwhelming but the real problem is, while we can estimate the production of plastic with some certainty, it is extremely difficult to know exactly how pervasive plastic pollution is on a global scale and how it is impacting human health and our environment. There are a huge number of researchers from a variety of scientific disciplines currently working on these issues. Some prominent research areas related to plastic pollution include:

  • Microplastics – a plastic pollutant that we still understand relatively little about. Microplastics are small plastic particles (<1 mm) that originate from larger plastic waste erosion and through the abrasion of synthetic fibres commonly used in clothing. A 2017 study on microplastics found that 80% of the drinking water samples collected on five different continents tested positive for the presence of plastic fibre. The exact environmental and health implications of microfibres still isn’t clear.
  • Location and movement – Understanding the location and transport pathways of plastic pollution can help us estimate how much there is, where it is and how it might be impacting the ecosystem. Unfortunately, the location of most plastic pollution is still unknown. Recent research suggests that there are roughly 300 billion pieces of floating plastic in the polar ocean while other research shows a significant amount of plastic is entering the food web.

A bottle dropped in the water off the coast of China is likely to be carried eastward by the north Pacific gyre and end up a few hundred miles off the coast of the US. Photograph: Graphic. Credit: If you drop plastic in the ocean, where does it end up? The Guardian. Original Source: Plastic Adrift by oceanographer Erik van Sebille. Click to run.

  • Lithosphere – Although the location of some plastics is unknown, others are now being found where we would least expect them… as part of the lithosphere! A new type of stone (plastiglomerate) has recently been discovered in Hawaii. This stone, which the research team believes is a result of burning plastic debris in an open environment, was found to be primarily composed of melted plastic, beach sediment, basaltic lava fragments and organic debris.

The methods used to communicate plastic pollution research, and its potential impact on the environment and human health, have been extremely effective in both mobilising citizens to reduce their own plastic use and is showing policymakers that the public wants a large-scale transformation.

As a result, plastic pollution is now being tackled by the EU Plastics Strategy, a political action that was largely driven by research and the subsequent public advocacy.

What is the EU Plastics Strategy?

The EU Plastics Strategy was adopted on 16 January 2018 after research into the extent and impacts of plastic pollution was conducted by a research team commissioned by the European Commission. The strategy aims to change the way plastic products are designed, used and produced within the EU. The strategy also outlines the European Commission’s primary goal of a 55% plastic recycling rate, with all plastic packaging in Europe recyclable or reusable, by 2030.

To achieve this, a €350m budget for research into innovative plastic design, production and collection has been reserved with the additional possibility of a tax on unsustainable plastic production.

Furthermore, the strategy is proposing better recycling programmes across all EU countries, clearer labelling on packaging so consumers fully understand its recyclability, easier access to tap water in public areas to reduce the demand for bottled water, and a ban on microplastics in cosmetics and personal care products.

With these aims, the European Commission hopes that the EU Plastic Strategy will reduce plastic pollution while also help the EU transition into a circular economy and reach their goals on sustainable development, global climate and industrial policy.

There’s still a long way to go

The release of the Plastics Strategy is just the beginning of the EU’s fight against plastic pollution – it’s the blueprint for legislation that will be implemented over the next couple of years. You can view the European Commission’s timeline of actions, directives and policies related to the strategy here.

Although the Plastics Strategy is only the first step towards implementing legislation, it is a strong signal to investors and the private sector that there is a lucrative market in plastic alternatives and recycling technology. This means that there is likely to be more money pumped into finding solutions on top of the €350m reserved for plastic research and innovation by the EU.

What’s the positive take home message?

Despite plastic pollution being a challenging and frightening problem, it is also a fantastic example of how researchers, civil society, policymakers and the private sector play different but complimentary roles in creating large-scale change. With the initial crisis highlighted by researchers, mobilised by civil society, acted upon by policymakers and invested in by the private sector, the threat of plastic pollution can also be seen as the beginning of a success story – we just have to follow it through!

Further information