The world’s most powerful economy, the United States, may be dismissing hard data and scientific consensus for now, while reasoned voices challenging the erratic plays of its leader Donald Trump are often drowned out.
The resulting upheaval – including an assault on scientific freedom and institutions – doesn’t seem to faze Prof Maria Leptin, president of European Research Council (ERC). She feels all this will pass and Trump, ultimately, won’t succeed in what he wants to do: “The US is hopefully a singularity right now, the irrationality of it will be sorted out.”
There is a global counterbalance; countries recognising “research [and innovation] is the way to go”, she underlines, yet underinvestment in science at this critical time is a risk, as is failure to address Europe‘s competitiveness and innovation gap with its main rivals.
She was in Dublin recently to speak at a Research Ireland forum where ERC grantees outlined their endeavours, to meet Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Minister for Research, Innovation and Science James Lawless – and to sit down with The Irish Times.
Owen Doyle: Chaotic cock-up cost Munster and it reflects badly on a number of people
Dublin-born Irish–American cardinal Kevin Farrell to run Vatican until pope elected
Pope Francis died of a stroke and ‘irreversible heart failure,’ the Vatican has said
New teachers will be fast-tracked into permanent posts to tackle staffing ‘crisis’
Leptin says Ireland should be admired for its tenacity, creativity and remarkable journey of transformation, but quickly adds: “I’m not here to flatter.”
She is leading a European conversation about science, innovation and public investment. Critically, she adds, publicly-funded frontier science must be scaled up too, while retaining the ERC’s independence in supporting exceptional researchers.
Her message comes with a request to the Government to scale up national research. Increasing Research Ireland’s annual funding from €300 million to €1 billion is warranted, she says, given our wealth – and would make Ireland an EU leader.
Governments often forget funding research and innovation is the cornerstone of long-term economic growth and not merely about accumulation of capital and labour: “It’s innovation, driven by new ideas, new technologies and smarter ways of doing things. And [that] depends on new knowledge, and new knowledge has to be generated through research.”
This provides the foundation upon which private-sector innovation builds, she says, investing in basic research and scientific infrastructure that the private sector – driven by shorter-term profit goals – simply won’t fund at the level required.
“Investing in research isn’t just spending. It’s planting seeds for future prosperity. It’s not charity to scientists, nor some bureaucratic indulgence ... it’s a pragmatic recognition the public sector research base underpins the entire innovation system, creating fertile ground for breakthroughs that ultimately benefit everyone.”
Leptin challenges the view that taxpayer money should be spent only where economic returns are guaranteed. “On the surface, it sounds reasonable. But what does ‘guaranteed return’ really mean? In the real world of science and innovation, the greatest impacts are often completely unpredictable. Basic research might appear uncertain or risky precisely because it explores unknown territory.”
History shows the biggest economic leaps often come from curiosity-driven research with no immediate practical application in sight. “Consider the internet, originally developed by publicly-funded research programmes to support particle physics experiments. Nobody could have foreseen its profound transformation of our economies and societies.”
It’s tempting to think of research and innovation as smooth and predictable; a relay race with each runner perfectly handing the baton forward until reaching a clear, guaranteed goal, she says. But the process is more like “chaotic, unpredictable, often messy” rugby.
Think lithium-ion battery, she says, a technology that made portable electronics possible and is powering the transition to electrification. “Its development had numerous false starts, setbacks and outright failures – materials that didn’t perform, prototypes that couldn’t scale, costly ventures that never made it off the drawing board. It took decades of research, performed around the world, before a practical lithium-ion battery was possible.”
Policymakers’ job is not to demand immediate success but rather to support and encourage this collaborative process, Leptin says.
[ Trump’s science policies pose long-term risk to innovation, economists warnOpens in new window ]
Research transcends national boundaries effortlessly too, building relationships and networks that yield diplomatic and cultural returns as well as scientific ones, she adds – a lesson for turbulent times.
“Ireland, more than many, knows the value of these global connections. Irish researchers punch well above their weight in securing international collaborations and in influencing global scientific discussions.”
Europe, however, “cannot afford complacency or short-sightedness at a time of unprecedented technological and geopolitical shifts” and must close a competitiveness gap with the US and China.
“Europe’s competitive edge – our collective ability to innovate and lead – is at stake. And Ireland’s future competitiveness is similarly intertwined with its commitment to a robust, publicly funded research system,” Leptin says.
That must happen with ease, whether it’s people moving (with pensions) between countries, or being able to roll out inventions across member states. “So it’s the countries that have to pull together. I’m not even going to go into telecommunications or the latest important thing, defence, Europe’s got to pull together in research as much as in all the other fields. If not now, when?”
Ireland, helped by €385 million in ERC grants, has made commendable strides already, she says, but there is no room for resting on laurels as “nations that undervalue or underinvest in basic research risk becoming passengers rather than drivers of the future”.
Ireland will have an important role to play during its EU presidency in 2026, in pushing for increased investment in research and innovation at European level, she adds. “Europe’s prosperity, security and global leadership are at stake, and your voice will matter greatly in these discussions ... If [it] wishes to lead in new technologies, digital transformation and sustainability, a substantial rethinking of our collective financial commitment is necessary.”
Getting to Denmark
The American political scientist Francis Fukuyama came up with the idea of “getting to Denmark”, as shorthand for an ideal – prosperous, fair, efficient governance and a vibrant economy supported by a high degree of trust.
Leptin recalls when in Ireland before people asked her why Denmark, a country with a similar population to Ireland, gets more ERC grants. Both countries are relatively small, outward-looking, open economies dependent on international trade, recognising the importance of research, innovation and high-quality education.
Yet, Denmark has made certain strategic choices in public policy, research funding and innovation strategy that many other countries can learn lessons from, she says. “Denmark spends consistently higher shares of GDP on public research compared to most European nations. But it’s not just about spending more. It’s about stability, predictability and strategic planning.”
This investment is consistent and stable, enabling long-term projects and ambitious research agendas to flourish. In contrast, she says Ireland’s public investment has grown significantly but remains somewhat unpredictable and subject to political cycles.
But Ireland is not Denmark, she says. “Your strategic advantages, such as your native English-speaking population and your globally connected diaspora, are assets that Denmark does not share. These unique strengths provide Ireland with opportunities that can and should be leveraged effectively in building your innovation ecosystem.”
Leptin accepts there is an ongoing issue of mistrust of science. The ERC awards an annual prize for public engagement to counter this. It is given to scientists who involve society in their work – the message being scientists are not an aloof elite, “they’re approachable and create genuine value for society”. Its hallmark is the public engaging with and contributing to research, when “the last thing they want to hear is the egg heads mansplaining to them about how important science is”.
Leptin makes a persuasive case for science asking fundamental questions about the universe and our place in it. In a question-and-answer session at the Research Ireland gathering, she becomes most animated in declaring Europe – including Ireland – has enough money to “fund a huge cultural good, and that is satisfying human curiosity”.
“You know what, our citizens actually are totally with us on that; they care about Higgs boson [the God particle]. That was front-page news. Nobody can tell me that the so-called man or woman in the street understands about Higgs boson, no way. Fermat’s theorem was on the front page ...
“The image of the black hole does not cure cancer, does not deal with climate change, does not deal with wars – [but] people love it. News from Pompeii is on the front page of The New York Times all the time; doesn’t help anybody. The fact that you all have 3 per cent Neanderthal in your genome doesn’t help you with Alzheimer’s either. So research, creation of knowledge is a human cultural good and we should bloody well fund it!”
