As such, Research Media Ltd will be providing coverage of the events in its flagship International Innovation publication, detailing the key issues, objectives and outcomes, as well as featuring interviews with prominent members of the ESF. Furthermore, complimentary copies of International Innovation will be available at the events.

International Innovation is a unique publication dedicated to the dissemination of the latest science, research and technology. It offers a bespoke service to researchers and leading scientific institutions who wish to highlight and share their latest work with those in the global research community, producing tailored articles and interviews to suit the needs of its clients.

Nick Brake, Director of Research Media Ltd, is enormously excited by the prospect of being an official media partner of all 2012 ESF events: “We are thrilled to announce our collaboration with the ESF at their upcoming events. The visibility that this will afford to the projects that we disseminate cannot be underestimated and we hope that our presence at the events will attract a wealth of new readers”.

The ESF is an independent, non-governmental organisation dedicated to pan-European scientific networking and collaboration and has played an essential role in mediating a multitude of heterogeneous research cultures and agencies. With a total budget of €61 million in 2010 and a projected economic impact in excess of €1 billion, it is a major driving force for advanced research in Europe.

To guarantee your FREE subscription to International Innovation and to ensure that you stay up to date with the latest ESF events, outcomes and interviews, please visit our dedicated subscriptions page at www.research-europe.com/subscribe.php.

Furthermore, for an overview of the ESF’s 2012 events, please see http://www.esf.org/activities/esf-conferences/2012-upcoming-events.html?year=2012.

Research Media Ltd is delighted to announce that it will be an official media partner of the COST Exploratory Workshop on Sustainable Protein Supply.

The one day event will take place in Amsterdam on Friday 16 March and will provide an opportunity for researchers and policy makers to discuss the most pressing concerns in supplying a sustainable protein supply in the future. In light of the FAO’s estimation that global meat consumption will rise to 463 tonnes in 2050, a collaborative approach to meeting demand and developing policies that promote sustainability is essential.

Nick Brake, Director of Research Media Ltd asserted: “We are thrilled to be an official media partner of the COST Exploratory Workshop on Sustainable Protein Supply. Sustainable meat and protein production is an important topic and a growing concern, and we hope that the event will make a major contribution to a more sustainable future”.

Key topics to be discussed at the event include improvements to the animal production chain, replacing animal protein with that sourced from plants, alternatives to conventional animal protein such as in vitro meat, and improved integration of the system.

Please see the COST website for further information: www.cost.esf.org

The programme sessions will offer a forum to present and debate on the current state of gender equality within research and science organisations. Research Media Ltd Director Nick Brake expresses his delight to play a key role in the Summit: “Research Media Ltd is pleased to promote the first ever European Gender Summit by serving as official media partner. As one of the leading scientific dissemination services in Europe, we look forward to spreading awareness of the importance of including all individuals in the pursuit of more comprehensive research and innovation”.

Participants will have the opportunity to learn about the latest research on gender and innovation, learn how to implement solutions to gender-related issues within their work environment, and contribute their project to be included in a reference base to be showcased at the stakeholder exhibition. The discussions will culminate in a manifesto on policy development on gender for innovation called “Integrated Action on the Gender Dimension in Research.”

The European Gender Summit is supported by the European Commission through the Science and Society Programme (FP7). Key speakers include Director of the Joint Research Council and the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, Dr Elke Anklam, and Chief Editor of the peer-reviewed journal PLos, Dr Virginia Barbour

Commissioner for Research, Innovation & Science Máire Geoghegan-Quinn encourages the Summit’s dedication to gender equality saying: “Specific measures are needed to support women’s scientific careers, and to address gender factors in the research process, with a view to improving quality. The European Gender Summit will show how these issues can be tackled more effectively through collaboration between scientists, gender research scholars and policy makers”.

www.gender-summit.eu/

Research Media are pleased to announce that they will be an official partner for this year’s event, where we will be distributing free copies of International Innovation – our publication dedicated to the dissemination of the latest science, research and technology.

Simon Jones, Director of Research Media states: “We at Research Media are thrilled to be an official partner of the European Innovation Summit 2011. Research clusters consisting of industry, SMEs and academia are essential for research, development and innovation, and we hope that the event will serve to highlight the most pressing and pertinent issues”.

This year’s event will be held from the 10-13 October, and will be split into two distinct parts: a summit in Brussels, for which President Jerzy Buzek has granted the patronage of the European Parliament, and a Ministerial Conference in Warsaw.

Organised by Knowledge4Innovation (K4I), a non-profit, independent multi-stakeholder platform with members from the European public, private and academic sectors, the event will adhere to the motto ‘Towards a European Innovation Ecosystem’. In Warsaw, the summit will focus on both adapting EU research and innovation policies in national and regional contexts, and increasing synergy between different policy areas. Furthermore, the Brussels-based activities will enable participants to examine the role of individuals –  and young talent in particular – in fostering innovation and addressing the challenges presented by funding.

In the past two years the event has proved to be a lynchpin in debates on the function, pitfalls and importance of supporting innovations, attracting some 2,000 innovation stakeholders and over 200 speakers, including the presidents of the European Parliament and the European Commission.

This year’s event promises to be just as engaging, with the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek; European Commissioner for Innovation, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn; and the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, William Kennard, already confirmed as but a few of the high profile speakers at this year’s summit.

With hot debate surrounding future European policy and budgets for European innovation initiatives, this event affords a timely and open forum to discuss the most pertinent issues for all involved.

For further information, see the official website: www.knowledge4innovation.eu/EIS/SitePages/eis2011_home.aspx

Connie Hedegaard sets out her vision for European climate policy under José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission

Firstly, could you offer an insight into what your role as EU Commissioner for Climate Action entails?

The responsibilities I have been given by President Barroso are fourfold:

• First, to help the EU meet its targets for 2020 and beyond in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions;
• Second, to develop and implement the EU Emissions Trading System and promote links to systems in other countries in order to build an international carbon trading market;
• Third, to promote the development and demonstration of low carbon and adaptation technologies, and to develop a strong scienti.c and economic basis for our climate policies;
• And fourth, to develop adaptation to climate change within the EU and to work with my fellow commissioners to build the adaptation dimension into all EU policies.

These responsibilities give me a central role in continuing the EU’s leadership insighting climate change and in the international negotiations, as well as in helping the EU to adapt to the impacts of climate change. To support me I have the newly created Directorate-General for Climate Action which will have around 200 staff once it is fully resourced.

What do you believe are the greatest challenges to achieving a sustainable climate, at present?

The international community has set itself the goal of preventing dangerous man-made interference with the climate system, and the Copenhagen Accord has endorsed the need to keep global warming below 2°C above the pre-industrial level. Without any doubt the greatest challenges are to get agreement on the deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions that are needed to achieve this, and then to make them happen in practice. At the moment global emissions are still steadily rising. This trend has to be broken. The scienti.c evidence shows that, to have even a 50 per cent chance of staying below 2°C, world emissions need to peak by 2020 at the latest, be reduced by at least 50 per cent of their 1990 level by 2050 and continue falling after that. As a . rst step the European Union is cutting its emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 and we are ready to scale up our reduction to 30 per cent if other major emitters commit to do their fair share. The pledges of reductions or actions they have made so far are welcome but not enough, so the immediate challenge is to convince our partners to come up to our level of ambition.
Must a balance be struck between the challenges of tomorrow and the demands of today?

Climate change is already happening so it is a challenge for today, not just tomorrow. And the science is telling us that we will only prevent climate change from reaching dangerous levels tomorrow if we take . rm action now. The longer we delay, the more dif.cult and the more expensive it will become.  Concerning other ‘demands of today’, it remains important to ensure that climate policies continue to strengthen the EU’s competitiveness, enable the Union to strengthen the security of its energy supply, support greener economic growth and create new jobs in the EU.

How would you assess international relations in terms of environmental policy, in the wake of the UN Copenhagen climate conference? Do you believe that signi.cant progress was made or does more work need to be done over the next year to create a uni.ed and binding consensus?

Both. I do think the Copenhagen Accord represents signi. cant progress but it does not go far enough. Clearly there is a lot more work to be done to reach the comprehensive, ambitious and legally binding global agreement that is needed. This work will continue over the course of this year and at the COP 16 Cancun conference starting at the end of November, and I acknowledge it may well take longer to get to a legally binding solution. In terms of international relations, Copenhagen put a lot of people under a lot of strain. I think that to some extent the dust is still settling and the way ahead needs to be discussed. That is why President Barroso has mandated me to undertake consultations with our main international partners in order to .nd ways to reinvigorate the process.

Is international collaboration a key element of your strategy for reducing the impact of climate change? Is there a desire to work with newly industrialised nations to ensure that their growth is sustainable and environmentally friendly?

International collaboration is absolutely indispensable to control climate change. The EU cannot solve climate change alone since we are responsible for a relatively small proportion of global emissions – just 10 or 11 per cent. That is why we have sought to lead by example, for instance through our climate and energy package, to show our partners in both the developed and the developing worlds what can be done in practical terms. Working with the emerging powerhouses is obviously a key part of our strategy and is increasingly moving to centre stage in our bilateral relations. For instance we have the EU-India Clean Development and Climate Change Initiative, and with China a Partnership on climate change that includes plans under which we will co-.nance a near zero emissions coal-.red power plant there.

How much is being done from an EU perspective to help support developing countries in mitigation strategies to adapt to the socio-economic and health impacts of a changing climate?

Since 2001, the EU has stepped up its climate . nance for developing countries. The efforts at the political level are re.ected in the EC’s development cooperation with third countries. Both mitigation and adaptation have been growing steadily in importance in our relations with developing countries. An analysis of the EC portfolio in 2008, shows that commitments for climate related interventions have increased since 2002, totalling over €1.7 billion. This demonstrates that a signi. cant amount of climate change integration has already taken place in development cooperation, and this will continue to be prioritised in the years to come, to ensure that EC development cooperation becomes increasingly sustainable. It is important to observe that this . gure only relates to what is managed by the Commission and does not take into account the signi.cant sums of climate funding provided by some of the Member States.

In addition, one of the most signi.cant aspects of the Copenhagen Accord is its commitment on .nancial assistance to developing countries. Industrialised countries have pledged a total approaching 30 billion US dollars for the period 2010 to 2012, of which 7.2 billion euros – in other words about one third – will come from the EU alone. This funding will be spent in a balanced way on both adaptation and mitigation. For the medium to longer term there is also a commitment of industrialised countries to mobilise 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 for the needs of developing countries. This .nance will come from a variety of sources, both public and private. The EU will need to decide on its contribution in due course.

There is still some confusion over the EU’s pledge to cut carbon emissions. What is the exact figure that the EU has committed to, and do you believe that this is a realistic target?

The target we have entered into the Copenhagen Accord is the dual target set by EU leaders in 2007. That is to say, we have made a unilateral commitment to cut our emissions to at least 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, in order to take a .rst step on the road towards the low-carbon economy. This 20 per cent commitment stands whatever other countries decide to do, and we are implementing it through the climate and energy package of legislation adopted last year and a major energy ef. ciency programme.

At the same time, we have made a conditional offer to scale up our emissions reduction to 30 per cent. The condition is that other developed countries commit to comparable emission reductions and developing countries contribute adequately to a global effort according to their responsibilities and capabilities.

Both targets are economically and technically realistic, and moreover the 30 per cent reduction is more in line with what is needed to control climate change. The science shows that to get global emissions onto a trajectory that has a fair chance of keeping warming below the danger level of 2°C, by 2020 industrialised countries need to cut their collective emissions by 25-40 per cent of 1990 levels and developing countries as a group need to keep their emissions growth to 15-30 per cent below business as usual levels. I want Europe to move to the 30 per cent reduction as soon as possible, so we need to work with our international partners to create the right conditions for that to happen.

Will the current European economic climate affect its ability to tackle climate change?

In political terms what we have seen is that the recession has not diminished Europe’s will to tackle climate change. The climate and energy package was agreed in December 2008 even as the economic crisis was reaching its height. Indeed, if there is a silver lining to the recession it is that governments, here in Europe as well as in the U.S., China, Korea and other parts of the world, have used it as an opportunity to start laying the basis for a more low-carbon economy.

What the overall economic effect of the recession will be on our ability to tackle climate change is harder to say. For instance we know that private sector investment in renewable energy has been cut back, which is obviously not helpful. At the same time, the emissions of industry are falling as a result of the economic slow down, making future targets more attainable. So the short-term effects are mixed.

You have stated that you hope to make Europe the most climate friendly region in the world within the next . ve years. What measures will you take to make this a reality?

Obviously the starting point is to ensure the measures in the climate and energy package are fully implemented. Quite a few technical decisions still need to be taken for that to happen, for instance on rules governing the auctioning of ETS allowances or emissions changes due to land use, land-use change and forestry. But we also need to go well beyond the climate and energy package and mainstream climate change into all relevant policy areas so they work towards the attainment of our climate goals and don’t con.ict with them. The Europe 2020 strategy to be proposed by the Commission in the next few weeks must provide a strong framework for this process. A priority area for action will be the transport sector where we will be developing a climate and transport package.

We also need to look well beyond 2020 to where we want to be in 2050. A key goal is to decarbonise our energy supply by then, so we need to chart the way ahead on that now and start putting in place the necessary measures. We must also deliver on the goal set by the previous Commission of developing a European strategy for adaptation to climate change by 2013. These are the key actions one can identify today but we will of course respond to further needs, and to further opportunities, as they arise.

With COP 16 taking place in November and the Kyoto Protocol expiring in 2012, the next few years will be extremely important. What do you hope to achieve by 2014, when your current position as Commissioner for Climate Action expires?

Let me just clarify that it is the Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period that ends in 2012, not the Protocol itself. In effect the emission targets will expire but all the other rules of the Protocol will continue to apply.

At international level the big prize, as I’ve already made clear, is to reach a global climate agreement that is comprehensive, ambitious and legally binding. The EU wants to have this as soon as possible but one of the lessons from Copenhagen may be that we are going to have to be patient. It was clear in Copenhagen that countries like India and China are not ready for a legally binding deal at the moment. Then there is the uncertainty over when the U.S. will be able to pass climate change legislation, without which others will remain reluctant to move. Once we do reach a satisfactory international agreement, there will almost certainly be important technical details to .esh out, as there were after Kyoto. So I can well imagine that negotiations on the deal itself and then on the technical details will continue throughout most if not all of my time as commissioner. To complete that process – and to see effective measures producing real mitigation in place in all regions of the world – by the time I leave would be a realistic goal.

In your view, what are the biggest challenges facing European education today? How can the European Commission help to address the challenges the economic downturn poses on education?

The EU relies on people’s talents and knowledge. Lifelong learning is an indispensable precondition for economic competitiveness in a globalised economy that is based on knowledge. Europe’s citizens need to be equipped with the right skills and competences for the jobs of today and tomorrow. And they also need higher skill levels than in the past: by 2020, 16 million more jobs will require advanced qualifications and the demand for low skills will drop by 12 million jobs.

These challenges have been put at the centre of joint European efforts to emerge from the crisis. Two flagship initiatives have been launched to help Member States to achieve these objectives: ‘Youth on the Move’ aims at improving the quality of initial education and training, supporting young people’s progress to higher skill levels and enhancing opportunities for learning and working mobility in Europe. This is complemented by the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs, an initiative to modernise labour markets and to help people acquire the right skills and competences throughout their lifetime.

Could you tell us more about the Youth on the Move initiative? What do you hope the scheme will achieve in terms of enhancing skills, employability and cultural diversity?

Youth on the Move is a flagship initiative launched by the European Commission to help the EU achieve the goals of its Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. As part of this comprehensive 10 year strategy, EU leaders have agreed to work together to boost employment and increase skill levels. A key target is to substantially reduce early school-leaving (from 14.4 per cent to less than 10 per cent across Europe), and to increase the share of young people graduating from higher education to at least 40 per cent on average.

Youth on the Move aims to contribute to these objectives through actions to improve the quality of education and training at all levels – including higher education – by providing more opportunities for young people to study or train abroad, and by improving support for those looking for their first job. I believe learning mobility can make a real contribution to skills development, especially as it allows young people to develop intercultural and communication competences, which are highly valued by employers.

What is the Youth In Action scheme and how does this support your work for young people? How important do you consider the need to engage young people in democratic processes at national, European and international levels? In your view, is enough being done to encourage tolerance and positive citizenry among youth?

Encouraging youth participation has been at the core of EU youth policy since its inception. The Lisbon Treaty explicitly encourages the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe. The Commission supports youth participation, particularly by organising a structured dialogue between youth and policy makers. The EU Youth Portal encourages the online participation of young people. The next group of EU Presidencies (Poland, Denmark and Cyprus) share the Commission’s commitment and have made youth participation a priority for the coming years.

The Youth in Action programme is the main EU funding scheme supporting non-formal education. It is a programme for all young people, but with a focus on disadvantaged groups. The main priorities of the programme are European citizenship, young people’s participation in democratic processes, cultural diversity and solidarity. Young people aged 15-28 can participate in a range of activities such as youth exchanges, youth initiatives and youth democracy projects. They can also volunteer abroad with the European Voluntary Service.

The programme also supports NGOs working with young people. Every year more than 130,000 young people receive EU support through the Youth in Action programme. It helps to reach the EU’s educational goals and contributes to the Europe 2020 reform strategy by building up skills likely to foster young peoples’ employability.

There has been much controversy and unrest in the UK recently about the proposed shake-up of (and increases to) university tuition fees. What is your stance on the accessibility of higher education to those from less privileged backgrounds? In your view, does higher education still represent good value for money, for both students entering it (and often incurring debts) and those countries subsidising students and institutions?

Both public and private funding can contribute to enabling higher education to meet Europe’s aspirations. Tuition fees, particularly when they are set at high levels, need to be backed up by robust systems of grants and/or affordable loans if we want to ensure that students, especially those from financially disadvantaged backgrounds, are not put off going to university, or forced to drop out because of financial pressures.

Higher education is an excellent investment for both the individual and for governments. A recent assessment by the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies at the University of Twente in the Netherlands looked at rates of return on investment in higher education studies. It found that higher education graduates earn 10 per cent more on average than non-graduates, and that the state benefits too, with graduates contributing 8 per cent more on average to the public purse through taxes and contributions to GDP.

Your website gives specific mention to the Marie Curie Actions programme supporting the mobility of researchers. How important do you view this scheme and the mobility of researchers generally? What other steps is the Commission taking to encourage the flow of the best researchers into and from Europe?

The Marie Curie Actions have an important role to play in the Europe 2020 strategy and the European Research Area by focusing on cross-national mobility and on enhancing the skills and career development of researchers. The EU has already provided grants to 50,000 researchers through this scheme. Marie Curie Actions offer attractive employment conditions in research, which are internationally competitive and in line with the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for their Recruitment. This is vital in order to keep researchers in Europe, attract the best from abroad, and encourage more people to undertake a research career. The EU’s support also contributes to an increased supply of highly qualified workers in Europe. It is estimated that the EU will need at least 1 million new research jobs if it is to reach its target of spending 3 per cent of GDP on R&D.

What role do you believe multilingualism has in enhancing your other areas of responsibility? In your view, if more professionals were multilingual, would mobility (for scientists/researchers and other workers) be greatly enhanced? Do you believe languages should be compulsory across European educational systems?

Yes, definitely. Linguistic diversity is part of the blueprint for the EU. Our motto is ‘unity in diversity’. According to the ‘2+1 principle’ agreed by EU leaders at the Barcelona summit in March 2002, every child should be taught at least two foreign languages in addition to his/her mother tongue from a very young age. It is up to the Member States to make sure that the teaching of languages is part of the curricula in schools and universities.

European businesses with international operations are increasingly aware of the necessity to use different languages. The ability to speak foreign languages is among the eight key competences defined and promoted by the Commission and the Member States with the aim of making future generations fit for the labour market. In a recent Eurobarometer study on the employability of graduates (November 2010), foreign languages were among the most required skills that recruiters will be looking for in the future. Researchers use English as a lingua franca to a high extent. But it is often people with the knowledge of other foreign languages than English that make full use of the opportunities on the European single market and benefit from learning mobility.

http://ec.europa.eu/education/

What is your vision regarding the development of regional policy across the EU?

The debate on the future of European regional policy after the current funding period ends in 2013 is well underway. In the context of both the Europe 2020 Strategy – which sets out the sustainable economic development blueprint for the Union for the next decade – and the EU budget review, 2011 is in many ways a pivotal year for laying down the foundations for the future policy.

We are working hard on preparing a regional policy which is relevant and appropriate for the economic situation of today. The financial crisis has underlined the need for a strong development policy, supporting processes of structural adjustment across Europe and addressing key bottlenecks to growth. It has also shown that we need a policy that continues to invest in the competitiveness of all regions, as well as supporting development in those lagging behind.

However, to achieve this, and to increase the effectiveness of policy in the future, we must simplify the rules. Future funding should also be focused on a limited number of priorities, in line with the goals set by Europe 2020 Strategy. We need to explore new financing models to pool resources between the public and private sectors to maximise the impact of the policy. And we need to focus more on results. Evaluating the impact of this investment, learning what works and why it works, is critical to its success. Letting the public know what has actually been achieved with their taxpayers’ money is also a cornerstone of democratic accountability.

Can you summarise what ‘regional policy’ entails, and highlight issues which must be addressed in today’s European climate? Can you offer an insight into your strategies for addressing economic disparities in Europe?

Regional policy is the expression of the EU’s solidarity with its less-favoured regions and countries. It works through integrated programmes to support the sustainable development of the regions and the EU as a whole. More specifically, it works to bring out the best in every region, make all regions competitive, and create more and better jobs.

Of the EU’s 271 regions, one in four has a GDP of less than 75 per cent of the EU average. There are diverse reasons for this inequality, with many of the poorest regions suffering from longstanding hindrances such as geographical remoteness or the legacy of centrally planned economies. However, allowing these differences to continue unchecked could damage the EU’s overall dynamism and competitiveness. The EU is committed to ensuring that this doesn’t happen – which is why such a significant amount of the EU’s overall budget (around one third) is invested through regional policy.

Between 2007 and 2013, regional policy is worth 347 billion euros. It is not just about transferring wealth from well-off regions to poorer ones. The money is targeted towards economic growth and the creation of jobs, for example, by improving transport links to remote regions, boosting SMEs in disadvantaged areas, investing in a cleaner environment and improving education and skills.

What is the significance in developing tailored policies for distinct regions of the EU?

The regional diversity of the EU, in which regions have vastly different characteristics, opportunities and needs, requires us to go beyond one-size-fits-all policies. This is why we have developed an approach that gives regions the ability to design – and the means to deliver – policies that meet their needs. This is what regional policy provides through its place-based approach.

Consequently, European regional policy – that is, its instruments and programmes – are largely managed in a decentralised way by the national and regional governments concerned. Within a common framework set by the EU, Member States and regions select priority areas for European investments. Each programme is developed in a collective process involving authorities at European, national, regional and local levels, as well as social partners. This ensures that each partner has ownership of the programmes and that they are best adapted to the needs of each region.

Why might it be suggested that European regional policy is – or ought to be – at the heart of the EU’s efforts for economic recovery and long term prosperity under the EU 2020 Strategy?

As the European community’s largest source of investment in the real economy, the EU’s regional policy provides stable investment at local and regional levels. In this economic climate, the importance of this investment is clearer than ever, providing robust support for budgetary stability and public investment in the regions. Regional policy is at the heart of the EU’s efforts for exiting the crisis. The policy made a significant contribution to the European Economic Recovery Plan. A series of measures have been taken to help simplify and speed up project implementation, and accelerate structural fund payments.

I am also convinced that we must ensure that the future regional policy is closely aligned with the Europe 2020 Strategy. The Europe 2020 headline targets cannot be achieved by policies formulated at EU or national level alone. Such an ambitious agenda can only succeed with strong national and regional participation and ownership on the ground. And regional policy has a vital role to play in providing incentives to foster adjustment to smart, inclusive and sustainable growth. It can ensure that community action is translated into real development on the ground, mobilising a wide range of regional and local stakeholders.

What would you highlight as the most pressing challenges facing policy makers in the development of regional policy, and how is the Department addressing them?

The main challenge facing European regional policy is that despite recent trends towards convergence (our recent evaluation reports show how investment from the policy has had a clear impact to help reduce economic, social and environmental disparities), significant differences between European regions remain. These are not just measured in terms of levels of economic development. More developed regions are also more competitive – that is, more innovative, with a more skilled workforce and higher levels of employment, and better endowed with infrastructure and a higher quality of government.

The challenge facing European regional policy today is to find the right policy to be able to address these challenges. Drawing on lessons learnt from the current and previous programming periods, as well as discussions with a broad range of stakeholders, the fifth cohesion report will make a series of proposals for reforming the policy. The focus here will be on making the policy more effective and more results-driven to achieve a greater EU, value-added in line with the priorities of the Europe 2020 growth goals. We also need to strengthen the governance of the policy and involvement of partners, as well as simplify its delivery system.

Sceptics might suggest that so-called ‘red tape’ – that is, extensive legislation and regulation – hinders socioeconomic development at regional levels. How might you address such claims?

I am aware that regional policy tends to be perceived as difficult and complex to manage. I would like to make two points here. Firstly, rules are in place for good reason. Complex projects involving a lot of money have to respect many rules (eg. Environmental assessments, state aid rules, public procurement rules, documentation standards, etc.). The checks and balances are inplace to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent properly and correctly.

However, I do recognise that there is always scope for improvement. This is why we are always striving to strike the right balance between getting value for money, without imposing a regulatory burden that turns people off. We have actively been looking at ways to simplify delivery over recent years, a process given increasing urgency with the crisis. We adopted a number of initiatives aimed at simplifying management rules which should help to facilitate access to the funds and accelerate flows of investment at a time when public budgets are under pressure. In the fifth cohesion report, we will also examine a number of ideas for further simplifying and streamlining the delivery system.

To what extent does the Department facilitate interaction and dialogue with stakeholders, industrial leaders, national governmental bodies and SMEs in identifying key concerns and developing workable solutions to these issues? How significant is collaboration in this regard?

The Directorate-General for Regional Policy attaches much importance to the interaction with stakeholders and beneficiaries of regional policy. We have developed a highly constructive, ongoing dialogue with stakeholders looking at key concerns and developing workable solutions to issues around the implementation of the policy.

For example, we organise regular meetings examining ways in which we can simplify the implementation of the funds and reduce the administrative burden. We held a meeting in June 2010 on ‘Streamlining the implementation mechanism of the Structural Funds’, to which we invited representatives of beneficiaries of the funds from the following sectors and authorities: SMEs and businesses; local authorities and public institutions; and research institutions as recipients of funds.

This is just one example – other informal dialogues have been established with civil society organisations, socioeconomic partners, and management and audit authorities, amongst others. This partnership aspect is an area which we are keen to strengthen even further in the future reformed policy, post-2013.

In what ways are you working to develop and stimulate innovation and growth in areas which have emerging knowledge economies?

Under the regional structural funds, 86 billion euros – a quarter of the total budget – is targeted for research and innovation between 2007 and 2013. However, innovation performance and take-up of funds varies considerably across the EU-27 Member States. The Commission has recently brought forward a new Communication: ‘Regional Policy contributing to smart growth in Europe 2020’, which sets out a raft of policy recommendations to tackle regional disparities and encourage higher levels of investment in innovation in the regions. Tabled on 6 October 2010 alongside the flagship EU ‘Innovation Union’, it calls for more effective use of EU regional funds to help boost innovation and meet the Europe 2020 goals on smart growth.

National and regional authorities are asked to design ‘smart specialisation strategies’ in cooperation with business, universities and research centres. These will help regions identify their best assets, focus on key priorities, increase cooperation with other regions, and identify bottlenecks to innovation. The aim is to concentrate resources on a limited number of priorities which are proven areas of comparative advantage, for instance, on clusters, existing sectors and cross-sectoral activities, eco-innovation, high value-added markets, or specific research areas.

To assist the regions in identifying their strengths and opportunities, the Commission will develop a ‘Smart Specialisation Platform’, bringing together expertise from universities, research centres, regional authorities and businesses.

Can you offer some tangible examples of the work which the department has facilitated or mobilised? What would you identify as its key achievements in recent years?

Evaluation reports published in April 2010 give a clear indication of the achievements of the policy. Regional policy has had a major impact on the European economy in recent years, reducing the economic gaps between different parts of the Union and promoting environmental and social development. It provides investment for modernisation, is a catalyst for change in all European regions and brings new business opportunities. We estimate that between 2000 and 2006, it helped to create 1.4 million new jobs, supported small firms and boosted research. It has offered valuable training opportunities to millions of women, young people, the vulnerable in society and the unemployed. It has modernised transport links, supporting the construction or improvement of thousands of kilometres of road and rail and the modernisation of ports and airports. It has also improved environmental conditions for millions of Europeans bringing the quality of drinking water and treatment of waste water up to EU standards.

In sum, the regional policy investment that Europe channels through the structural funds has made a huge difference to the lives of millions of citizens across the EU.

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy

Environmental policy and legislation made centrally in Brussels bears great relevance to citizens across the EU, and is intimately related to economic prosperity, as Karl Falkenberg outlines in the first of a two-part interview for International Innovation

What tangible results is EU environment policy delivering for citizens, and how has it helped European industry become a world leader in a number of high-growth sectors?

All EU Member States now have an array of powerful legislation in place to protect the environment. This means protecting its water, its air, its nature and its climate, and ensuring that waste is disposed of properly, thus preserving the environment for the citizens of today and generations to come.

Many people are unaware of how much of their national legislation is actually shared by Europe as a whole. In fact 80 per cent of environment legislation in most European countries is there as a result of European initiatives, and differs little from country to country. The EU has produced some 200 directives in the field of environment, and these are the basis of every Member State’s environmental legislation.

European industry is still leading the way in a number of green sectors, and I think the Commission can take its fair share of credit for that. Industries need certainty, and when we bring in strong climate and energy legislation, we are also giving businesses a very powerful incentive to invest more heavily in green energy sectors. But it isn’t just about emissions; we are also encouraging much greater efficiency in resource use, particularly in materials, water and bioresources. There is no doubt that the world is moving towards an economy where resources will be ever more constrained. That’s why we are planning a major drive on resource efficiency, to ensure that it becomes second nature to European industries. That is the best way of ensuring their long-term survival.

Could you explain why several Expert Working Groups have been set up and how their implementation has helped the European Commission in defining the environmental research needs within the main thematic strategies of the sixth Environment Action Programme (EAP)?

R&D can help us to better understand our environment and develop solutions to many of our existing problems. An important challenge for us, therefore, is to make best use of research results and new scientific findings when developing and implementing policy.

Over the past years, there have been many efforts to improve the dialogue between scientists and policy makers. And so, during the process of developing the thematic strategies, several Expert Working Groups were set up to help the Commission in defining environmental research needs. Some of the considerations which have emerged include:

•         Soil research, which serves the definition and development of the key issues in the soil thematic strategy such as soil erosion, the loss of soil organic matter, compaction, salinisation and sealing

•         In line with the thematic strategy on waste and on the sustainable use of natural resources, research takes into consideration the whole life cycle of the resources, eg. when developing and validating new methods to assess the environmental impacts of waste generation, or developing indicators to highlight the advantages and drawbacks of new waste management and recycling technologies

•         Current and future projects on more sustainable farming approaches, in particular alternative methods to the use of chemical pesticides, is in line with the thematic strategy on the sustainable use of pesticides

As always with such working groups, different stakeholders – Member States, industry, academia, NGOs – were represented.

Can you shed light on the European Green Capital Award, and the work that is being conducted by DG Environment to improve the quality of life of EU citizens in urban areas?

Urban areas are the source of many of today’s environmental challenges – not surprising, since three out of four Europeans live in towns and cities. Local governments and authorities can provide the commitment and innovation to tackle many of these problems.

One of the policy tools we are using to address these challenges is the European Green Capital Award which recognises and rewards local efforts to improve the environment, the economy and the quality of life in cities. We have seen how this can be done.

Stockholm and Hamburg were named as the first two title winners for 2010 and 2011, respectively. With their measures to tackle air pollution, traffic and congestion levels, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste and waste water management, they are worthy role models.

After lengthy discussions we have reached an agreement on who should hold the title for 2012 and 2013. Competition was again very tough, but Vitoria-Gasteiz in Spain eventually won through for 2012, followed by Nantes in 2013.

The European Green Capital Award is really all about sharing good practice, and I’m particularly looking forward to seeing how Hamburg does that in 2011. I should point out that this isn’t just a quest to find Europe’s greenest cities – it’s also about showcasing model ways to deal with the real problems faced by many urban centres all around the Union. The Award aims to show how these successes can be replicated, giving those of us living in urban areas good reasons to be optimistic! For more details about the European Green Capital Award, visit: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/index_en.htm.

The structure of the Commission is testament to the fact that, in light of the global climatic and environmental threats we face, widespread collaboration is a prerequisite for a meaningful framework for action. What is your perspective on the apparent failure of world leaders to reach any kind of meaningful consensus at the Copenhagen climate summit? Can you outline your thoughts on the progress made at Cancún last year?

I’m not sure it’s useful to think of Copenhagen as such a failure. It clarified a number of important questions, and it did produce an accord with very wide consensus which, even if informal, endorses the EU’s core objective of keeping global warming no higher than 2ºC above the pre-industrial temperature. Industrialised and developing countries, representing more than 80 per cent of global greenhouse gases emissions, have indicated emission targets and actions in the Accord. Even if the sum total of their individual indications remain well short of the effort, science tells us is necessary to respect the 2°C target.

Cancún was another step forward in that it brought those promises – and all the other key elements of the Copenhagen Accord – into the UN framework, together with an explicit statement that a bigger effort will be needed in the future if we are to keep warming below 2°C. So now we also have a process to discuss, clarify and step up those pledges – and that is key to keeping developing countries on board.

We need to understand that climate negotiations are fundamentally economic negotiations with major implications on the competitiveness of individual nations in their respective search for growth and development. Free-riding on the protection of a collective good is always a challenge in such a situation.

The work of the Environment Directorate-General covers a vast array of programmes, issues and thematic areas. How, as Director General, do you ensure that the Directorate, and its staff, are focused, with the same goal in mind? Furthermore, to what degree do the different DGs and departments at the European Commission interact and collaborate?

The obvious answer to this is communication. Internal communications are very important, both inside the Directorate-General and between the Directorate-Generals, and we give a lot of thought to both of these areas. Inside the house I try to ensure that we remain focused on a number of core objectives, and the directors disseminate the results of our weekly meetings to ensure there is a clear line from the top. I also hold regular meetings with the whole DG to keep in touch with all levels of the Directorate. I try to foster a culture where everyone can speak their mind, not only out of respect for my staff, but also because everyone here is an expert in something, and they all have valuable experience to share.

Communication between DGs is well organised – it has to be, or the Commission would grind to a halt. As you know, the Commission itself is actually a body of 27 Commissioners who meet each week to reach consensus on all the major decisions that are needed. Those weekly deliberations are the culmination of a long series of consultations which begin with consultations of the public, and feature constant consultations between DGs, both informally and in the more formal process we call interservice consultations.

It’s now a very well-oiled machine. The Commission has grown to its current size over 50 years, so we have had plenty of opportunities to refine the process.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/

What are some of the ways you are currently protecting and improving the environment for present and future generations?

Over the last 30 years, we have developed a comprehensive body of European environmental legislation. We have legislation that protects natural habitats, defends clean air and water, ensures proper waste disposal, improves knowledge about the toxicity of chemicals, and helps European businesses move towards a sustainable economy. In recent years we have focused on modernising legislation and ensuring consistency between different environmental polices. This includes the recent revision of the Water Framework Directive and the new Waste Framework Directive which focuses on waste prevention and puts in place new targets which will help the EU move towards its goal of becoming a recycling society. The EU’s REACH Regulation, which is currently being implemented, is the most advanced chemicals legislation in the world. It will lead to the safe production, use and management of chemicals which will benefit us all.

How intrinsically bound are economics and the environment? Since economic and environmental objectives are often perceived as being contradictory, how do you unite them and use economics in environment policy?

The state of Europe’s economy and the condition of the environment affect the lives of all Europeans. People want to enjoy economic prosperity and a healthy environment. Economy and environment are invariably linked, occasionally negatively, but the truth is that the link is often much more positive.

Firstly, a large part of the economy depends on the environment – around 3.4 million people are employed directly in the eco-industry, and many more jobs depend on a good quality environment. Europe is already a leader and net exporter in environmental technologies and we want to strengthen our position as market leader in a fast-growing global market.

Overall, the objectives of economic policy and environmental policy are often aligned. Environmental policy is trying to support a process of structural change and the transition to a resource and energy efficient economy. Improving efficiency is a principle that all businesses would agree with.

To give just one example, it is estimated that meeting the target of 20 per cent renewable energy in final energy consumption by 2020 will create a net 410,000 additional jobs and boost GDP by 0.24 per cent. On the other hand, not tackling environmental problems leads to costs for business and also for people, both in the form of health impacts and a poorer environment.

An economist would say that the benefits of tackling environmental problems exceed the costs; or, to put it another way, the cost of inaction is larger than the cost of taking action to safeguard our environment.

R&D can help us to better understand our environment and develop solutions to many of our existing problems. How challenging is it for environmental policy to make the best use of research results and new scientific findings in policy development and implementation? What has the 6th Environment Action Programme (6th EAP) recognised in this regard?

Environment policy should be based on sound science. Science-based policy making involves integrating scientific findings, research results and the knowledge generated by innovative technological developments into the policy cycle.

The challenges are evident. DG Environment has a firm interest in maximising the clarity of the scientific and economic messages that accompany its policy proposals. Scepticism arises when we have not made the case clearly enough about the need to care for the environment. Tackling that scepticism requires policy firmly based on strong scientific evidence that can be explained clearly and concisely.

We are currently exploring a new approach so that scientific knowledge becomes even more central to our policy making and implementation tasks. The rationale behind the better integration of sound scientific knowledge is that it provides clear evidence of the need for change through policy. Science therefore contributes to more (cost-) effective and efficient policy making throughout the policy cycle, ie. covering the identification of the scope of policy, its conception/adoption and then its implementation, monitoring and review.

DG Environment will increasingly bring its data and information requirements into sharper focus, and work towards more effective working arrangements with data providers. In that way, we can better anticipate our data needs and link them more efficiently with the development of new policy and therefore bring about positive change.

Motivating the scientific community to see policy work as an avenue for their output is important, but difficult. We are also looking at how to streamline the links between research, environment, the business community and others. Not only will this kind of loop enhance the strength and depth of EU environment policy, it will also improve the potential for its implementation, since those most affected by it will have been an integral part of its creation.

In that way, we can embrace the wider stakeholder community and encourage behaviour that will bring about the changes necessary to consistently improve the state of the environment in Europe and beyond. This is exactly in line with the 6^th Environment Action Programme message on integration and also within the broader drive towards better regulation.

In what way does your flexible organisational structure allow you to respond quickly to new developments?

DG Environment has been recently re-organised to better match the re-organisation of the portfolios of the new Commission, but also to ensure a more effective work in a revised organisation chart. We have to respond and possibly anticipate new policy priorities and challenges, and we have strengthened the economics and scientific units inside a new Strategy Directorate. Beside the new structure, we also have a more flexible structure that allows us to perform our work more effectively. For instance in DG Environment we have recently created a Task Force on Resource Efficiency, building on the expertise in the DG across different thematic areas and Directorates, in order to prepare a new policy paper next year and ensure a multidisciplinary approach to this crucial policy at the heart of the Europe 2020 Strategy.

What are the main criteria by which you evaluate the success of the Environment Directorate-General?

DG Environment is a service of the European Commission. Our success is measured in relation to European environment policy and how the Commission has been able to take it forward, in collaboration with the other EU institutions, particularly the EU Council and the European Parliament. I expect the EU to continue playing a leading role internationally on environment policy, to continue to protect the natural environment and the quality of life of its citizens, and to indicate new sources of green growth and a sustainability path for its businesses. I expect DG Environment to be the engine behind all that.

How do you see the role of the Directorate developing in the future?

Environment is consistently one of the European policies most supported by EU citizens, and this is both a strong motivation and a responsibility. With sustainability and resource efficiency at the heart of Europe 2020, I see environment policy finally reconciling with economic considerations, and a stronger contribution of water efficiency, clean air, waste recycling, and green products to green growth and a more sustainable and competitive Europe. Given the complexity of the environmental challenges we have ahead, from biodiversity loss to water scarcity, we need to invest in a better knowledge base to adopt even more effective environmental policies. We will help Member States when appropriate and pursue them with infringement procedures when necessary, to ensure proper implementation and enforcement of EU legislation. And I see DG Environment further playing a leading role in international negotiations, be it in international fora (such as the UN) or in bilateral agreement (such as on forest issues), to ensure that our environmental objectives are pursued beyond EU borders.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/

First, could you describe GEO’s objectives and how it works to promote the broader goals of the National Science Foundation (NSF)?

The Directorate for Geosciences (GEO) is one of seven research arms within the NSF. Its mission is to support research in the atmospheric, Earth, and ocean sciences. As the principal source of federal funding for university-based fundamental research in the geosciences in the U.S., GEO addresses the nation’s need to understand, predict and respond to environmental events. Basic research in the geosciences advances scientific knowledge of Earth’s environment, including resources such as water, energy and minerals. GEO-supported research also advances our ability to predict natural phenomena of economic and human significance, such as climate changes, weather, earthquakes, fish-stock fluctuations and disruptive events in the solar terrestrial environment.

GEO provides support for interdisciplinary studies that contribute directly to NSF research priorities and goals such as understanding, adapting to, and mitigating the impacts of global change, developing and deploying integrated ocean observing capabilities to support ecosystem-based management, and understanding future availability of fresh water.

Could you highlight some major areas of interest where GEO is currently focusing its efforts to ensure the survival of our planet? Are there any research areas you wish to strengthen through increased funding in the future?

In our 2012 Fiscal Year, increased funding and focus will be given to research in sustainability, cyber-infrastructure (data and framework), and hazard-preparedness and response. NSF as a whole is focusing on key national priority areas, that require the expertise of physical, biological, and social scientists and engineers, as well as educators at all levels. NSF-catalysed research includes investments in clean energy and cyber-infrastructure; areas that are poised for innovative breakthroughs. GEO is playing a prominent role in the following research areas:

• Sustainability. The Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES) portfolio consists of programmes that spark innovations for tomorrow’s clean energy solutions with a cross-disciplinary approach to sustainability science. SEES is designed to foster innovative insights about the environment-energy-economy nexus that will increase the effectiveness of our energy and management policies in adapting to and mitigating the impacts of climate change and improve our capabilities for rapid response to extreme events. SEES foci for FY 2012 include mechanisms for both research and education in sustainability, including research on Sustainable Energy Pathways (SEP), a formal programme of Postdoctoral Fellowships in Sustainable Solutions, and targeted awards in the Partnerships for International Research and Education (PIRE) programme

• Hazards and Resilience. GEO is planning a new programme on Creating a More Disaster Resilient America (CaMRA). The overarching goal of CaMRA is to catalyse basic research efforts at NSF in hazard-related science to improve forecasting and prediction of natural and hazardous events

• Observing Networks.

i. National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). NEON will consist of geographically distributed field and lab infrastructure networked via cybertechnology into an integrated research platform for regional to continental scale ecological research

ii. Ocean Observatories Initiatives (OOI). OOI will enable continuous, interactive access to the ocean via multiple types of sensors linked by cutting-edge cyber-infrastructure, which will produce never before-seen views of the ocean’s depths

• Cyber-infrastructure Frameworks.

This focus area builds on NSF’s long history of providing leadership for cyber-infrastructure and computational science for the U.S. academic science and engineering community. NSF will support the development and deployment of comprehensive, integrated, sustainable, and secure cyber-infrastructure to accelerate research and education and new functional capabilities in computational and data-intensive science and engineering, thereby transforming our ability to effectively address and solve the many complex problems facing science and society

Could you provide insight into how funding is distributed among GEO’s three organisations – Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS), Earth Sciences (EAR), and Ocean Sciences (OCE)?

The GEO Directorate as a whole supports novel, complex, or partnership projects in both research and education. These investments cut across traditional boundaries within the geosciences, encouraging interdisciplinary activities and responding directly to critical needs of the entire geosciences community. GEO-wide funding is used to develop innovative means to initiate and support geosciences education, attract underrepresented groups to careers in the geosciences, foster the interchange of scientific information nationally and internationally, and to join with other parts of NSF in major integrative research and education efforts.

AGS supports activities to further our understanding of the physics, chemistry, and dynamics of the Earth’s atmosphere, from the Earth’s surface to the sun, on timescales ranging from minutes to millennia. AGS provides support for: 1) basic science projects; and 2) the acquisition, maintenance, and operation of observational and cyber-infrastructure facilities and services that enable modern-day atmospheric and geospace science research activities.

EAR supports fundamental research into the structure, composition, and evolution of the Earth, and the life it has sustained over the 4.5 billion years of Earth history. The results of this research will lead to a better understanding of Earth’s changing environment, the natural distribution of its mineral, water, biota, and energy resources, and provide methods for predicting and mitigating the effects of geologic hazards such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods and landslides.

Research, education, and infrastructure funded by OCE addresses the central role of the oceans in a changing Earth and as a national strategic resource. OCE supports interdisciplinary research of the water column to better understand changing ocean circulation and temperature, the health of marine ecosystems, and changing ocean chemistry with implications for ocean acidification. OCE also supports research on the geology of the ocean margins and sub-seafloor to investigate past ocean and climate conditions, stability of methane hydrates, natural hazards associated with earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, and microbial life deep below the seafloor. Since ocean science requires access to the sea, OCE supports research vessels, deep submergence capability including submersibles and autonomous vehicles, and technologically advanced sensors and instrumentation.

Is there a healthy interest from students and early career scientists to pursue the field of geosciences? What are you doing to encourage a new generation of researchers?

GEO has a robust and comprehensive education and outreach portfolio aimed at fostering the next generation of geoscientists. GEO staff and management employ multiple modes of support to educational institutions through grants, outreach, conferences and workshops, and research results dissemination. GEO also sponsors and/or participates in several Fellows programmes to provide enriching work experiences for early career scientists.

There is a natural role for the geosciences to play in advancing broad STEM literacy and engaging students in STEM careers. Earth Science, defined broadly, is intrinsically fascinating for students and of clear relevance to their daily lives. GEO is working in collaboration with NSF’s Education and Human Resources Directorate to promote activities that improve the quality and availability of geosciences education in formal learning settings. I believe that in the near future, we will need more geoscientists than we have in the pipeline – due to retirements and the expanding need for that type of expertise in many, if not most, sectors of the economy.

To what extent is GEO dedicated to engaging other NSF directorates in its work?

The growing family of sustainability science, engineering and education activities represents a major, cross-Directorate, interdisciplinary investment by the NSF that can be grouped into three themes: Environment, Energy and Resilience. Within these themes, GEO supports a wide variety of research that is linked to questions relating to climate change, human-modified environments and environmental hazards. Research involves drivers of climate change, such as greenhouse gases (GHGs), aerosols (particles) and changes in the land surface, and the dynamics of climate change. Significant effort is focused on water resources and drought, the effects of sea level rise, as well as possible changes in the structure and dynamics of marine ecosystems and fisheries. The routing and flux of water dictates the rates by which physical, chemical and biological processes occur within the Earth’s Critical Zone (the layer between the top of the forest canopy and the base of the weathering horizon), affecting flood and debris flow, rock weathering and soil production, sustainability of agricultural and ecological systems, carbon flux and the long-term evolution of topography and its impact on both bio-system evolution and local climate.

How do you convey your research and findings to policy makers?

GEO leadership and staff are very active in meeting and speaking with stakeholders regarding our support of geosciences research. Programme officers, for example, forge very strong relationships with the scientific communities they serve through site visits, conference presentations, email communications, newsletters, review panels, and various publications. GEO participates in publication of project highlights through NSF and project reports through the centralised portal for federally-supported research at www.research.gov.

Additionally, the ‘broader impacts’ activities associated with many GEO-funded research projects provide a mechanism for scientists to become engaged in education and outreach efforts and development of the next-generation workforce.

Many scientists and researchers consider this to be a crucial time to address problems such as climate change and availability of resources. How optimistic are you that we will be able to tackle these issues before it is too late?

Sustainability science, engineering and education require a multifaceted consideration of the natural environment and human populations, energy use, the built environment and human behaviour in order to meet the challenges brought on by large-scale environmental change, and the economic, technological, resource, agricultural and cultural demands of our modern world. NSF support of sustainability research represents a coupling of basic research with societal application, adaptation and improvement. NSF research can accelerate understanding of scientific problems which in turn can inform decision making for improvements to human and natural conditions.

Our global community is at a critical juncture where scientifically-based choices need to be made and action has to be taken. Solutions to sustainability challenges require the robust, interdisciplinary approach that characterises the emerging fields of sustainability natural and behavioural sciences, engineering and education. I remain optimistic that we will be able to address sustainability and resource security issues (food, water, finite materials, etc.), but not by conducting ‘business as usual’. We need to re-double our efforts!

How do you see GEO’s focus and role developing into the future?

Flexibility and strategic planning are keys to the future success of GEO. Given the nature of geosciences research and the financial climate, inter-agency and international collaboration are more important now than ever before. Geosciences are increasingly driven and enabled by vast amounts of data and information. Collecting, mining and analysing data to draw meaningful conclusions and to identify trends in the Earth System has become a challenge in its own right. Working towards common frameworks and data-sharing across political and disciplinary boundaries is required for the advancement of the geosciences.

Transformative approaches and innovative technologies are needed for heterogeneous data to be integrated, made interoperable, explored and re-purposed by researchers in disparate fields and for myriad uses across institutional, disciplinary, spatial and temporal boundaries. Geospatial data, metadata, enabling software/hardware, and training are essential elements relied on by much of the sustainability workforce and must be optimised to increase researchers’ productivity and capabilities. Science enabled by data and supporting cyber-infrastructure will be central to furthering our understanding of the Earth System.

www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=GEO