Editorial - MCAA Magazine January 2021

© Krzysztof Gurszyński - lenses.eu.com

The global pandemic we have been experiencing for the last year has shown how connected we all are, both as individuals and as members of society. It is truly global since the (responsible or irresponsible) behaviour of a signle individual or community affects us all. Even communities and individuals not directly or only minimally affected by the pandemic have been experiencing its deep effects, and are bound to do so in the future: from the wider economic impact to the smallest changes in people’s daily habits. It is unity in diversity, in the words of the European Union’s motto. Regardless of our diversities, we are all united by this crisis.

While coordinating the collaborative effort for an International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, in the period between the mid 1930s and mid 1940s, Otto Neurath’s vision experienced a double shift. Firstly, he moved from a hierarchical to a horizontal conception of science. From an idea of science as a pyramid to the idea of science as a mosaic. Secondly, he extended his unified vision of science beyond the so-called hard and natural disciplines, to include “all sorts of disciplines”: from sociology and education to ethics and aesthetics. All disciplines are crucial for engineering a just society, and jointly contribute to the progress of humanity

The current pandemic has precisely shown how all disciplines are relevant in our attempt to navigate the tumultuous waters we find ourselves in and safely reach the other side of the river. Not only medical disciplines, which are at the forefront of this crisis, but all the others as well. Consider how much we need the social sciences, history and the fine arts, just to name a few areas. The social sciences in order to study ways to successfully implement new health policies. History to tell us how past crises were tackled and how they affected social equilibria. The fine arts to devise new narratives for a collective processing of the lasting effects of this crisis. Once again, there is unity in diversity.

Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, research, at least EU research, has been facing a further, major crisis: a funding crisis. The European Commission has been planning to substantially cut funds for research. Cuts that will significantly affect all EU research activities, including its flagship programmes like the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions and the European Research Council grants. Programmes that are based on the researchers’ freedom to choose their own topics, and do not impose reaching immediate applications.

The European Commission’s plan has raised widespread criticism. Many voices have highlighted that a global pandemic is not the right time to cut research funds. It is difficult to think of a right time where such considerable cuts in research funding are acceptable. On the surface, these protests may appear to be fuelled by self-interest: it is just workers complaining about cuts to their own salaries and work conditions. They are not. Many funding bodies, including the European Commission, have understandably (re)allocated specific funds to this pandemic. It is an emergency response action. A necessary and crucial one, but still an emergency response. Reducing funds and readdressing them towards topic-focused research cannot be a systematic strategy. As with any major social crisis, the lasting effects of this one will run so deep and become so widespread that one should not expect to tackle them on a case-by-case basis. We will need all the knowledge and expertise accumulated in decades of funding free research. The widespread call against the European Commission’s cuts is a warning siren sounding a social alarm, as subtle as is pressing.

After all, today’s free and well-funded research may help solve tomorrow’s crises.

Gian Maria Greco
IRRADIUM Editor-in-Chief