Dear Reader of EuroScientist,
You have been accustomed over the past five years to see EuroScientist evolving and trying to live up to its motto: “European science conversations by the community, for the community”. It is a participatory web magazine, with a vision to reflect the diversity of voices ranging from practicing scientists but also policymakers, businesses, science communicators and citizens on all dimensions of science and its interfaces with society. Policy for science, science for policy, ethical issues and values around science, technology and innovation, citizen engagement with science, but also careers and work-life balance of scientists, scientific integrity and the way governance and funding mechanisms influence a healthy science endeavour, are among themes that are centre stage. Better societal choices for science and for society are the aim.
Our editor, Sabine Louët, has to be given credit for leading this evolution and turning EuroScientist into a valuable contribution to the European science conversations. And our Editorial Board, until last year led by Gilles Mirambeau, certainly shares in this credit.
But over the past two years the EuroScience Governing Board has been forced to carefully look into the financial basis of EuroScientist. As we have so far not yet been able to raise substantial financial contributions, it is impossible to continue as business as usual.
We do believe that a web magazine as described by the above motto has considerable value, and EuroScience is committed to try and continue, but for the time being we will have to do so with more inputs from volunteers. Our editor, Sabine Louët, has informed the readership that we could not continue her contract as of April 1, 2018. That is regrettable but unavoidable. The Governing Board has taken several steps to make sure that the new Governing Board of EuroScience which will take over at the end of ESOF2018 in Toulouse, has several options to discuss.
One of the Governing Board members has promised to make available a significant amount of time to explore the options he thinks could help bringing in some financial support in the short term.
Secondly, while we will not change the goals and the mission of EuroScientist we will focus the coming months on anticipating the debates at ESOF, as we have done by the way, in the past. So, we will ask organisers of key sessions at ESOF2018 to begin the conversation with you in EuroScientist. That does not stray away from the goals of EuroScience as it is clear that the topics mentioned above under the motto will figure prominently at ESOF2018 as well.
The important debate on FP9 is another example. The European Commission intends to publish its proposal in June 2018, and intensive preparatory debates are still taking place. On topic is for example about “missions”, a new element the Commission wants to introduce in FP9. We will try to have EuroScientist contribute to such debates as well on the way to ESOF2018.
In addition, we will merge the EuroScience Newsletter into EuroScientist. It was a cause for some confusion in the past anyway, so it is a good opportunity to move forward now. Homo Scientificus Europaeus (HSE) will also be integrated in EuroScientist website in the following weeks. HSE bloggers will be invited to contribute to EuroScientist magazine.
Fourthly, I would very much like to invite you contribute whatever you think is useful and valuable for the discussions in the wider science community and beyond that among stakeholders in science and innovation. Please send your contributions as in the past to office@euroscientist.com.
I am looking forward to continuing vibrant debates.
Yours sincerely.
Peter Tindemans
EuroScientist is looking for contributors!
If you would like to write guest posts in EuroScientist magazine, send us your suggestions of articles at office@euroscientist.com.
peter.tindemans@euroscience.org
- Is a reorganised DG RTD truly equipped to reform and improve the Science, Technology and Innovation systems of Member States? - 8 April, 2021
- Funding system of research: changes, yes, but don’t distort reality - 8 July, 2019
- UK-EU27 collaboration in science: vital but uphill struggle against Brexiteers - 1 July, 2019
EuroScientist journal 
I did rather enjoy the quality of Euroscientist’s articles. But overally both Euroscientist and Euroscience seem to me to be the organizations straight from the 1990s, out of touch with reality.
Terrifying lack of job stability among university researchers, disastrous business practices of scientific journals’ publishers (Elsevier, Springer etc.), overproduction of science graduates leading to systemic underemployment, dismantling of public research infrastructure, a major loss of trust of the public in science in general, universities torn apart by nonsensical political movements and by private business… These are the real issues. They require strong opinions, not safe, boring articles. They require genuine in-depth studies to understand these issues, not some superficial interviews or uninformed statements. And they require a regular, consistent “militant but not partisan” coverage.
If Euroscience was meant to represent the “community” of researchers, it does rather a mediocre job, as it only scratches the surface of the community’s problems. It is sad, because it looked like if it might have had a potential to genuinely contribute to the cause.