Archives: Uutiset

In the evidence review report Biodegradability of plastics in the open environment conclude that biodegradable plastic has a role to play in reducing the accumulation of plastics in the environment. However, its role is limited to some specific applications. In other cases, including single-use packaging and plastic bags, it would be better to reduce the amount of plastic we use — or to re-use it, recycle it, or, where we can, compost it in industrial plants.

The SAPEA experts also stress that calling something ‘biodegradable’ does not mean that it will biodegrade in all conditions. Whether an item will biodegrade harmlessly depends not only on the item itself, but which environment it ends up in, what it breaks down into, and how long that takes. The working group consisted of seven eminent scientists nominated by academies – one of them professor Jukka Seppälä from Aalto University.

In their opinion, the advisors recommend:

• limiting the use of biodegradable plastics in the open environment to specific applications for which reduction, reuse, and recycling are not feasible, rather than as a solution for inappropriate waste management or littering;
• supporting the development of coherent testing and certification standards to realise the potential environmental benefits over conventional plastics;
• to promote the supply of accurate information on the properties, appropriate use and disposal, and limitations of biodegradable plastics and their applications to relevant user groups.

The recommendations will contribute to the forthcoming Commission’s policy framework related to bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics, and help define the main challenges and policy actions needed in this area.

 

Science Advice for Policy by European Academies (SAPEA) is a EU-funded project that provides independent scientific advice to European Commissioners to support their decision-making. SAPEA collaborates actively with European science academies.

“Scientific knowledge of climate change and its drivers has been growing exponentially during the past decades, yet the degradation of nature and continued growth in greenhouse gas emissions has yet to even cease let alone start reversing. We have to ask if just trying to adjust ‘business as usual’ can safeguard our future on this planet” says Prof. Michael Norton, EASAC’s Environment Programme Director. EASAC’s new publication lays out the scale of the problems that face humanity to match human development with the capacity of the Earth and examines the calls for a fundamental transformation of our current economic and social systems across technological, economic and social domains.

Demand for energy and resources has been growing as a result of population growth and increased consumption to the point where all the scientific evidence shows we are bumping up against fundamental planetary boundaries on which our civilizations depend. EASAC summarises this evidence with a focus on climate and biodiversity, describing what many international scientists have been thinking since the 1970s – that current unsustainable trajectories are built into our economic theories and our political reward systems. These fundamentals need to be reset so that long-term sustainability is built into our decision-making at all levels rather than just left to altruism at the fringes.

The short-term perspective of many vested interests in continuing the status quo (whether in fossil fuels, resources extraction, high consumption in the linear economy, overfishing, conversion of forests and so on) is a formidable barrier to change. “Decision-makers seem to listen more to vested interests than to science,” says Anders Wijkman, Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Science. “The science message has been consistent since the 1970s on the finite nature of the planet but been ignored. Incremental emissions reductions – achieved so far – are far from what is needed”

Emission Gap is widening

Climatewarming is proceeding too fast to meet the Paris Agreement objective of avoiding dangerous climate change. Positive feedback effects that accelerate warming are already occurring. Even with the extreme effects of the COVID19 pandemic, the gap between what is needed in terms of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and what is being achieved continues to widen.

At the same time, biodiversityis being lost at a rate that will weaken and degrade the services we rely on from nature and sabotage progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) in poverty, hunger, health, water, cities, climate, oceans and land. That is what drives the conclusion that achieving sustainability may only be achieved through transformative changes.

What keeps us from listening to the science?

“There is much talk of redirecting our values and reward systems towards a more sustainable economy whereby we can live well within our planet for more than just a few more years. But the inertia of the ‘brown economy’ cannot be underestimated”, says Norton. Even now, fossil fuel interests have succeeded in capturing almost double the post-COVID19 recovery funds in G20 countries allocated to renewable energies. Food and agricultural interests are driving deforestation, land clearing and over-fishing but continue to be subsidised and escape paying for the environmental costs of their activities.

Wijkman: “The problem is the short-term nature of our political and economic system. I call it the tyranny of the now. So-called wealth is detached from the real wealth of our environment and our well-being. We have even delegated stock market speculation to algorithms and regard that as wealth – even though it has no real value. That’s just one illustration of our disconnect with the physical reality of our planet and its limits.”

Concrete change measures

“Our focus should be on well-being and welfare, but our economic system puts all focus on growth and GDP which adds fuel to the climate and biodiversity crises”, Wijkman says. “Yet, we are not becoming happier by consuming more and more and more material goods. The pandemic hopefully has demonstrated that consumption in itself is not the main objective or goal in life. It‘s well-being that is the main goal.”

The scientists list some of the most urgent and transforming change measures:

• Replace GDP by measures of real well-being that don’t rely on exploiting and destroying the planet’s resources
• Overcome the vested interests in the brown economy – starting with replacing perverse subsidies with positive incentives for environmental responsibility
• Steer our economic system to think long-term
• Engage industry and finance sectors to drive the changes and engage the public through new approaches (examples provided in the publication)
• Grasp the opportunities now of the post-COVID and Green Deal stimuli to start to fix the system which is no longer fit for purpose.

Read the full publication: Towards a sustainable future: transformative change and post-COVID-19 priorities

European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC) is a cooperative organisation for science academies in Europe. The Council of Finnish Academies is a national member of EASAC.

Hydrogen is an important alternative for sectors that are stuck in the fossil fuel economy. As national governments and European parliamentarians negotiate the EU’s hydrogen strategy, EASAC issues a new commentary. “Hydrogen can help reduce our dependency on fossil fuels,” says William Gillett, EASAC’s Energy Programme Director. “But the climate benefits will be limited, if we use fossil fuels to produce it – even with carbon capture and storage. The EU must stop all subsidies to fossil fuels. The fast growing demand for hydrogen must be met by a massive increase of renewable electricity, together with certified imports from third countries.”

“Electricity is a great way to decarbonize our economy. But important sectors such as ships, trucks, planes and steel production cannot easily be powered by electricity. To become climate neutral, they need a fuel that can be transported like oil or gasoline, or that can convert iron ore to steel at high temperatures like coal”, explains William Gillett, EASAC’s Energy Programme Director. “The growing demand for hydrogen and synthetic fuels will require much more renewable electricity to be generated in the EU. In addition, Europe will need imports and must therefore develop partnerships with third countries to drive global trade in renewable hydrogen and in technologies to produce it.”

Carbon capture and storage does not make fossil-fuel based hydrogen climate neutral

EASAC calls on the EU to remove direct and indirect subsidies, taxes, levies and other incentives for fossil fuels. Says Gillett: “Direct and indirect support to fossil fuels sends wrong signals. The EU should rather strengthen carbon pricing and revise the emissions trading directive to build investor confidence in future markets for renewable electricity and renewable hydrogen. Even in combination with carbon capture and storage, fossil-fuel based hydrogen still has a significant carbon footprint. To achieve carbon-neutrality, the EU should take a leadership role in global markets for renewable hydrogen and in the manufacture of low cost electrolysers to produce it.”

Avoid expensive lock-ins to infrastructures

The scientists also highlight the importance of avoiding premature and expensive lock-ins to new or renovated infrastructures that are subsequently made redundant by cheaper technologies or market developments.  “In the electricity sector, distributed generation is playing an ever increasing role. Building on this experience, it makes good sense to think local for hydrogen and adopt a phased approach: initially deploying distributed electrolysers for local hydrogen production feeding into local market networks”, explains Gillett. “Also, let’s not forget that the synthetic fuels pathway is less efficient than using electricity together with a battery or using electricity directly, so hydrogen or synthetic fuels will predominantly be used only where electrification is not an option.”

Read the Commentary: Hydrogen and Synthetic Fuels

 

European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC) is a co-operative organization for science acamies in Europe. The Council of Finnish Academies (CoFA) is a national member of EASAC.

 

European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC) is a umbrella organisation for European science academies. The Council of Finnish Academies (CoFA) is a national member of EASAC.

The global network of science academies InterAcademy Partnership (IAP) gives 21 recommendations recommendations regarding open science policies and practices. Dr Henrikki Tenkanen (University College London/Aalto University) were a member of the IAP open science group producing the report IAP input into the UNESCO open science recommendation.

The report were produced in order to support and complement the UNESCO open science recommmendation in order to create common standards for open science in global level. The recommendations are directed towards multiple stakeholders – individuals, institutions and, more generally, all the open science actors that should collaborate to fully realize them. They vary in level of specificity, but all, individually and in aggregate, play a role in reaching the goals of open science. Ultimately, their implementation serves society at large by providing the foundation for scientific collaboration without borders.

1. Adopt and promote open science practices to strengthen the relationship between society and science, thereby allowing citizens to engage more fully in issues of societal importance
2. Promote and support science, and in particular open science; it plays a critical role in mitigating global threats and disasters, and reducing risks through decreasing the knowledge gap. Use open science accordingly to make evidence-based decisions and policy.
3. Create awareness among researchers about the many opportunities offered by openness.
4. Ensure equity of access such that both producers and consumers of scientific outputs have equal access.
5. Promote cultural change in research settings to support open science practices.
6. Ensure that open science policies are harmonized to the extent possible, taking existing international agreements into account and identifying ways to improve them.
7. Create a policy environment for open science by aligning and implementing policies that are conducive to sharing research outputs.
8. Provide policy makers with appropriate access to outputs, so that they can make more informed decisions.
9. Support the development of national/ international legal instruments to allow for sharing across repositories without regard to national or regional boundaries.
10. Develop cybersecurity and adequate e-infrastructure, including among others, appropriate identification and tagging for open science outputs.
11. Advance the construction of open science platforms to facilitate broader and more inclusive knowledge for scientific advancement, addressing regional problems and recognizing the value of indigenous and local knowledge.
12. Foster training in open science to construct and prepare outputs so that all can take advantage of the open movement – including open data, open software and open publications.
13. Consider adopting licensing schemes that allow the distribution of scientific outputs internationally, or developing new models more adequate for science outputs.
14. Foster public-private partnerships to enhance open science.
15. Promote open education practices, and support the production of FAIR educational materials, and the training of those who prepare these materials for designing and producing content that is approachable for potential readers.
16. Create conditions for publishers and scientific societies to work together, so that they can develop new business models for equitable publication and access.
17. Promote the rapid availability of intermediate research results in cases of major emergencies.
18. Implement appropriate regulations and incentives for good open data and open software practices, and sanctions for misuse.
19. Recognize the value of open outputs and the practice of open science as a means of creating collaborative ecosystems.
20. Recognize and reward the merit of those who work in the creation and maintenance of open outputs. Revisit existing metrics for assessing research impact, going beyond publications. Reform the research evaluation system to incentivize open research practices.
21. Explore the potential of open science practices to reduce scientific misconduct, including the fabrication and falsification of results and plagiarism.

In June 2020, InterAcademy Partnership IAP published a Communiqué on structural racism and discrimination:

“The events that have unfolded since the unjust and untimely death of George Floyd have served as a painful reminder of the problem of entrenched systemic racism in our societies, not only in the United States, but in most countries in the world. The actions of racial equality activists from around the globe have exemplified just how strongly this has resonated with all of us.

IAP is by its very nature – as the association of over 140 academies from all corners of the world – opposed to racism and discrimination. The cooperation within and between the academies is solely based on scientific merit. Furthermore, IAP is continually committed to maintaining diversity among its leadership, staff and volunteers and promoting inclusivity in all of its activities.

In this historic moment in time, we are acutely aware of the unique role that the scientific community is poised to play. We are invested in engaging our global colleagues in the work that must be done to deconstruct discriminatory policies rooted in systemic racism.

We fundamentally believe that any solutions to combatting structural racism and discrimination must be rooted in a global effort to address and dismantle the systems and policies that have allowed these practices to be maintained. As such, we stand in solidarity with those who are committed to bringing about not only justice, but lasting change. As we move forward, we are committed to endeavoring to bring about a society in which everyone is treated without bias and is afforded equal opportunities.

The current COVID-19 pandemic is also shining a bright light on the striking racial and social disparities in access to and quality of medical care for black people and other ethnic minorities as well as other socially disadvantaged people. IAP and many of its member academies have joined a movement led by health policy experts from around the world to demand health equity globally and we are engaged in a resulting ongoing dialogue with UN and WHO leadership on this issue.

IAP reaffirms its commitment to its vision – that the world’s academies play a vital role in ensuring that science serves society inclusively and equitably. IAP is also involved in a forthcoming project on the right to science, recognizing that all people have the right to share in the benefits of advances in science and technology.

IAP joins the International Science Council (ISC) and its international partners in the science community in undertaking urgent action to participate in a global dialogue on systemic discrimination in science and to take concrete actions aimed at combatting it.”

The Communiqué is signed by the members of the steering committee of IAP.

Science and medical experts from all over Europe caution that enthusiasm on the broad potential of regenerative medicine applications has led to a gap between expectations and the realities of translating regenerative medicine technologies into clinical practice. In an era of stark competition on the global medicine and healthcare market, some regulators have become increasingly permissive.

The joint report of EASAC and FEAM Challenges and potential in regenerative medicine was published 1 June.

Fast-track approvals put patients at risk

“Analysts expect the market for regenerative medicine to grow fast over the next years. It is only natural that this raises high hopes both from desperate patients and the biotech industry”, says Prof. Giulio Cossu of the University of Manchester. “As a result, regulators are pressured to accelerate authorisation procedures for stem cell and gene-based therapies. This trend puts patients at risk.”

“We are now at the threshold of being able to correct major genetic and other diseases. But for many diseases, more evidence is needed, especially for the more complex polygenic and acquired degenerative disorders. The consequences of not addressing the critical scientific issues for evidence-based implementation would be to waste investment, research efforts and aspirations to cure.”

Unethical offers of miracle cures

The Academies also point out that the idea of regenerative medicine is to tackle diseases which up to now are incurable. According to the report, cosmetic applications, for example, are inappropriate for the time being.

“So far, regenerative medicine has proven itself only in few specific clinical indications, for example for skin disorders. Yet, we see an increasing number of unregulated clinics promising a wide range of benefits on the basis of poorly characterised medicinal products with little evidence of effectiveness. They usually advertise their services via the internet with the primary intention of financial profit,” explains EASAC Biosciences Programme Director Dr. Robin Fears.

The scientists therefore urge the EU to resist the pressure and put patients first. “When countries lower regulatory standards in their eagerness to support national economic interests, it is even more important for the EU as a major global player to defend the principles of international cooperation in health regulation”, says Prof. George Griffin, Co-chair of the Working Group and President of FEAM.

“We all want cures to be available in the shortest time frame possible. But our analysis and recommendations aim at ensuring that regulatory procedures are robust, transparent and evidence-based,” concludes Cossu. “Scientific research and proof are more important than ever. The EU and national regulators should be wary of not undermining public trust in science.”

Climate Change Education initiatives in addition to looking at causes of climate change need to expand to focus more on mitigation and adaptation, and help students understand that mitigation is not only crucial for future generations but is also essential for current disadvantaged populations on whom climate change is having the biggest impact.

These are some of the conclusions of a recently published ALLEA report A snapshot of Climate Change Education Initiatives in Europe: Initial findings and implications for future Climate Change Education. The document has been prepared by ALLEA’s Science Education Working Group and contains recommendations based on an on-line survey of existing initiatives complemented by educational research literature and the expertise of the scholars who conducted this work. Professor Maija Aksela from University of Helsinki was a member of the working group.

The report’s further headline recommendations include amongst others:

• Existing high-quality examples of Climate Change Education resources for different age groups should be collated so that educators throughout Europe could use them in different educational settings.
• The development, implementation and assessment of high-quality professional development programmes for teachers and the impact of these professional development programmes on the teaching and learning about climate change should be focused on.
• More local initiatives that are fully contextualised and address the needs of communities should be developed.
• Climate Change Education resources and programmes should adopt more solution-oriented and collective action approaches to climate change.

“It is encouraging to see that there is a myriad of educational resources available to support teachers in teaching about climate change. However, it is also apparent that climate change education faces numerous challenges that require urgent actions, actions that will require significant financial support. It is essential therefore that a funding framework, perhaps similar to those of the highly successful FP6 and FP7 EU funding Frameworks, is established to support research in and the development of effective approaches for teaching and learning about Climate Change”, comments professor Cliona Murphy, chair of the working group.

The online survey was administered by ALLEA and shared with its membership of more than 50 sciences academies across Europe, which were encouraged to further reach out to relevant universities, education providers and outreach organisations that address climate change education in their work.

Thus, this scoping survey maps a sample of current Climate Change Education initiatives in a non-exhaustive way, to identify commonalities, gaps, and best practices. While the sample in the current study is relatively small, it provides informative and relevant findings that are particularly timely taking cognisance that climate change is one of the key challenges identified by the European Commission in their 2020 Work Plan among others. Key findings from this exercise aim to inform a more representative large-scale survey of Climate Change Education initiatives throughout Europe.

 

The European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities (ALLEA) is an umbrella organisation for European academies. The Council of Finnish Academies (CoFA) is a national member of ALLEA.

EU and national authorities need to act now to support the health of migrants, according to European academy networks ALLEA and FEAM in their joint statement Statement on Migration and Health (pdf). This situation has become more critical as the lack of basic services and overcrowded conditions in refugee camps start to sound alarms all over Europe, especially during the coronavirus crisis.

The statement reviewed evidence showing that, in contrast to previous concerns, the transmission of communicable diseases from migrants does not appear to be a substantial problem. However, evidence also shows that migrants and other vulnerable populations are at high risk for several non-communicable and communicable diseases, including COVID-19.

“During this terrible crisis the issue of migrant health has been almost completely forgotten in Europe,” says Professor Luciano Saso, Vice-Rector for European University Networks of Sapienza University of Rome. “Forcibly displaced migrants are still struggling to reach Europe, exposing themselves to COVID-19. The incipient economic crisis threatens to further reduce the resources allocated by the EU to face migrant health issues.”

Academies recommend wider and easier access to healthcare services for forced migrants, and at least basic and emergency healthcare for irregular or undocumented migrants. Early access to healthcare may also lead to cost-savings for host countries.

According to Professor Alfred Spira, a member of the French Academy of Medicine, “The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically shows that the health of migrants is being considered as a marginal matter. All international and European legal instruments recognise the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, and all EU Member States should act to allow access to these basic human rights for everyone, including migrants and refugees.”

The coronavirus crisis has provided a global opportunity to enhance the integration of migrants while addressing shortages of healthcare workers. The recommendations within this statement, though drafted before the COVID-19 outbreak began, have acquired new relevance as several countries such as Germany, the UK, the US and Australia are incorporating refugees with foreign qualifications to address shortages in their health workforce.

The document concludes that reliable, validated and comparable data across countries and regions is the key element that will inform policies and confront myths around migration and health. Academies offer their support to lead the dialogue and scientific work to guide policies in this complex area.

This statement has been published at a time when developing evidence-based policies is particularly important. These recommendations, if transformed into policy, will enhance the protection of migrant health and of public health overall.

The recommendations from the academies include:

• More scientifically validated data and frequent updates on migrant health should be produced and reflected in evidence-based policies.
• Increased cross-sectorial collaboration is needed to address current challenges in migrant health, also with a view towards tackling shortages of healthcare workers.
• The health sector should be actively involved in policy discussions and actions on migration.
• National health systems should allow for personal health information to be easily transportable and accessible while ensuring the protection of personal data.

This statement came about as the result of a joint ALLEA-FEAM conference on Migration, Health and Medicine held on 22 November 2019 in Brussels. Attended by stakeholders from research, policy and the civil society, this event strove to approach the topic of migrant health from a multidisciplinary, cross-sectoral point of view and in a coordinated fashion transcending national boundaries. This places the Academies of Sciences and Medicine in a critical position as they offer impartial scientific advice to policymakers for taking informed decisions.

 

ALLEA is the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities, representing more than 50 academies from over 40 countries in Europe. Jointly with its Member Academies, ALLEA works towards improving conditions for research, providing the best independent and interdisciplinary science advice, and strengthening the role of science in society.

The Federation of European Academies of Medicine (FEAM) is the umbrella group of Academies of Medicine, Medical Sections of Academies of Sciences, Academies of Veterinarian Sciences and Academies of Pharmaceutical Sciences. FEAM promotes cooperation between national academies and provides a platform to formulate their collective voice on matters concerning medicine, health and biomedical research with a European dimension.

Europe’s top scientists agree that a radical change is coming in how we produce and distribute food, to ensure food security and deliver healthy diets for all. A new report from SAPEA lays out the social science evidence on how that transition can happen in an inclusive, just and timely way.

The Evidence Review Report A sustainable food system for the European Union provides an evidence base for the scientific opinion of the European Commission’s Chief Scientific Advisors. It was requested by the College of Commissioners and written by a multidisciplinary group of leading scientists, nominated by academies across Europe.

Based on the best available evidence, the report concludes that the key steps towards the new model are not only to reduce food waste and to change our consumption patterns — but also to recontextualise how we think about food in the first place.

“Food is an incredibly complex system, with social, economic and ecological components”, says professor Peter Jackson, the chair of the working group that wrote the report. “Yet, it contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions and plays a key role in driving climate change. The food system is responsible for around a third of global greenhouse gas emissions. The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates the annual financial cost of wasted food to be €900 billion in economic costs and an additional €800 billion in social costs. That’s why “business as usual” is no longer an option.”

“Our report doesn’t stop at highlighting the problems, which are now widely recognised. It also provides a range of evidence-based examples about how the transition to a sustainable food system can happen.”

Among the report’s other main conclusions are:

• The transition to a more just and sustainable food system needs to be coordinated at multiple levels of governance and involve a range of actors in both land-based and marine environments.
• To change how our society consumes food, we must first change people’s routines, habits and norms. Behaviour change is best effected with joined-up actions, addressing groups rather than individuals.
• Taxation and legislation are key ways to drive change, while European policies in agriculture and fisheries offer great opportunities for developing robustness and sustainability in food production.

The report informs the Scientific Opinion from the European Commission’s Group of Advisors, which is also being published today which in turn will inform the Commission’s new ‘Farm to Fork strategy for a sustainable food system’.

 

SAPEA (Science Advice for Policy by European Academies) provides independent scientific advice to European Commissioners to support their decision-making. It brings together outstanding expertise in engineering, humanities, medicine, natural and social sciences from over 100 academies, young academies and learned societies across Europe. The programme is part of the European Commission’s Scientific Advice Mechanism.