SHIFT mag [n°8] - Knowledge, research and society by SHIFT mag

10➜12 2008

n°8

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

Knowledge, research and society

CONTENT 04

Open access: the new paradigm of scientific publishing

Moving along: end of the line or pit stop?

08 >

11 >

Lab Scene Investigation

PostScript

Shifting with Paul Magnette

Boost your Erasmus, get involved

16 >

18 >

Reservoir Blogs

If you canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t beat them, join them!

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

COMING UP SOON THE

The Clash: Europeana

22 > New SHIFT Mag website

NEW SHIFTMAG WEBSITE! www.shiftmag.eu Discover exclusive online features

After 2 years of online presence, www.shiftmag.eu is entering a new era. The new version of the site will be launched in early 2009 with an original new layout and exclusive content. Chek it out at www.shiftmag.eu

F O R I N F O R M AT I O N ON ADVERTISING IN S H I F T M A G , CONTACT ANDRES BELLEMANS (andres.bellemans@tipik.eu) FLORENCE ORTMANS (florence.ortmans@tipik.eu)

Get SHIFT Mag articles online

React and take part in the debate

Explore our european web selection

10➜12 2008

n°8

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

Knowledge, research and society 12

EDITORIAL SHIFT Mag

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS Avenue de Tervueren 270 1150 Brussels – Belgium www.shiftmag.eu

Victor Fleurot SHIFT Mag Editor Brussels

Publisher: Juan ARCAS juan.arcas@shiftmag.eu Editor: Victor FLEUROT • T. +32 2 235 56 21 victor.fleurot@shiftmag.eu Deputy Editor: David MARQUIE • T. +32 2 235 56 41 david.marquie@tipik.eu Contributors to this issue: Bernard RENTIER (Liege), Tiago OUTEIRO (Lisbon), Laurence VAN MELDEREN (Brussels), Laurent VAN BRUSSEL (Brussels), Adriano FARANO (Paris), Frédéric DARMUZEY (Brussels), Kris OLDS (Madison, USA), Victor FLEUROT (Brussels), David MARQUIE (Brussels) Illustrations: Roberto TRIOSCHI, Mi Ran COLLIN, François TACOEN, Laurent VAN BRUSSEL, Christophe WANLIN, Wim TACITURN, Emmanuel TRÉPANT, Brieuc HUBIN Photography: Mauricio LIMA/AFP PHOTO, cabinet de M. Paul MAGNETTE Special thanks to Maria GALLO URRUTIA for linguistic coordination and Séline YAVUZ for editorial support Production & coordination: Nadine SCHWIRTZ nadine.schwirtz@tipik.eu Design & Graphics: Tipik Studio Printed by: Van Ruys, Brussels

Paradigms shift. SHIFT paradigms. In its eighth issue dedicated to knowledge, research and society in Europe, the magazine is still striving to find a fresh angle on the issues that shake up our continent. Light-hearted wit and serious analysis mix to create a colourful picture of the given theme. This time we look at knowledge and research in Europe. What place do they hold in our society? Are we getting any closer to becoming the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world? In this issue, we talk about success stories like Erasmus, and cases where the jury is still out like Europeana. About the daily life of a laboratory worker and the struggle for open access to scientific publications. We also have a Belgian minister and former EU constitutionalist sharing his views on knowledge and expertise in politics. And, as always, the unidentified PostScript and explosive Reservoir Blogs. Quite a lot to chew! But the festive break will help you digest our latest serving. We hope you’ll be fully recharged and on the deck for the launch of our new website in the new year. In the meantime, enjoy the end of 2008 and the annual circus that fills the winter’s longer nights. We promise we’ll be back next year with more of the same… and more! Enjoy the issue and drop us a line at www.shiftmag.eu

Administration & subscription: Ricardo DA SILVA RIBEIRO • T. + 32.2.235.56.05 ricardo.ribeiro@tipik.eu To advertise in SHIFT Mag contact: Florence ORTMANS • florence.ortmans@tipik.eu • T.+32 2 235 56 46 Andres BELLEMANS • andres.bellemans@tipik.eu • T. +32 2 235 00 41 SHIFT Mag • 2008

Tipik Communication – A SWORD Group Company. Avenue de Tervueren 270 – 1150 Brussels – Belgium. Free quarterly publication (cannot be sold). Published by Tipik Communication. Reproduction in any form is prohibited without prior consent. The views expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent those of SHIFT Mag.

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH AND SOCIET Y

OPEN ACCESS THE NEW PARADIGM OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING

s a revolution in access to knowledge underway? Is the availability of abundant, easily accessible digital information, mainly on the internet, becoming the new paradigm, breaking the monopoly of paper? With Web 2.0, the context is changing considerably, and it is clear that these are crucial times for our relationship to information, knowledge and, ultimately, the world. The business models on which “information industries” are based are seeking a new path between dissemination objectives and media profitability. The current economic and financial crisis, but also the environmental crisis, are raising the stakes and could precipitate the switch to new models for developing and accessing information. From this perspective, the world of research may have been pointing the way for some years. Indeed, the issues underlying free access to scientific information, magnified by the growing impact of the internet, exemplify the challenges which all stakeholders in the areas of information and publishing

TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE ORIGINS AND ETHOS OF OPEN ACCESS AND THE I N I T I AT I V E S O F T H E UNIVERSITY OF LIÈGE IN THIS FIELD:

http://www.soros.org/ openaccess/index.shtml http://www.ulg.ac.be/ cms/c_17700/open-access

are now facing. Therefore, it is worth explaining the debate that is increasingly stirring up and mobilising the research community today: open access to scientific publications.

Reclaiming control of the dissemination process The movement began about fifteen years ago as a reaction of research institutions and universities to increasingly exorbitant, unaffordable subscription fees for scientific journals, the main vectors for the dissemination of scientific research results. In the various disciplines, these costs have doubled, or more frequently tripled, over the last 15 years, without any particular justification and far beyond the rise in the price index (around 30%). The first to sound the alarm were, logically, those in charge of documentation centres. But awareness of this issue has grown, with more and more staff at universities and research institutions keen to find ways of avoiding the “profit above all” policies of the largest scientific publishers. The movement in favour of open access offers researchers themselves a way of reclaiming control of the process of disseminating their own scientific output. Indeed, it is through selling this knowledge, generally produced through public funding, that the publishers of scientific journals make their profits; none of those profits make their way back to the authors (researchers), and their intellectual property rights are flouted.

“Golden road” and “green road” However, the internet revolution is bringing about a change in this situation.

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

Researchers, who were initially sceptical or suspicious (traditional publication in prestigious journals guarantees international recognition of their work), are becoming increasingly convinced by the alternatives offered by electronic publishing. In 2001, the most active players in this field started the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and launched a huge information and awarenessraising campaign, targeting scientific communities throughout the world. The signatories, which now total several thousands (researchers, universities, governments, research funding bodies, etc.), are committed to promoting the development of two new publication strategies: auto-archiving in online institutional repositories and direct publication in open access journals. This second strategy is the “golden road”, the ideal way, for it creates new journals, often on the initiative of researchers, or encourages old journals to change their business model. The first strategy, referred to as the “green road”, is a compromise that makes it possible to protect the respective rights of researchers and publishers, while ensuring maximum visibility of scientific data thanks to the interoperability of the databases created.

Wider, quicker and more democratic dissemination It is estimated that 20% of scientific literature worldwide is now available through Open Access, 15% via the green road and 5% via the golden road. And this trend is growing. In this area, the University of Liège is successfully

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

increasing its initiatives and is playing a pioneering role in Belgium and Europe.

“

The movement in favour of open access offers researchers themselves a way of reclaiming control of the process of disseminating their own scientific output.

From a sociological perspective, Open Access alters the relationship of researchers with the all-important act of publishing their findings. From an economic point of view, it brings about fundamental changes in a market which was previously characterised by the dominant, if not monopolistic, position of a handful of publishers. In response

The machine is in motion, and publishers who do not plan for it or incorporate it in their development are, I am certain, doomed to disappear. > Bernard RENTIER Dean of the University of Liège Liège Belgian

Bernard Rentier runs his own blog (http://recteur.blogs.ulg.ac.be/) on the University of Liège’s website. He is the founder and director of the EurOpenScholar initiative, launched in October 2007 at the University of Liège. EurOpenScholar gathers deans and directors of European universities with the objective of continuing and extending the promotion of Open Access among researchers and decision-makers.

”

The Open Access model is particularly well-adapted to the interests and objectives of researchers, as it allows for wider, quicker, more effective and more democratic dissemination of the knowledge that they produce. The advantages are also obvious for universities and all (public and private) research funders, which benefit from increased visibility of the work of the researchers, which in turn strengthens their reputations.

to this groundswell, those publishers must adapt, often very reluctantly, contributing to the emergence of a new model that better reconciles the different interests.

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH AND SOCIET Y

MOVING ALONG: END OF THE LINE OR PIT STOP?

“

esearch needs investments. In equipment and consumables, of course, but above all, in people. Training scientists is a complex and expensive process. They need to be exposed to different realities and different ways of thinking. For years, European countries have invested large amounts of money in training people by sending them abroad.

Europe needs to promote mobility of both undergraduate and postgraduate students, so that they can widen their horizons and develop their skills. The Erasmus programme has a strong tradition in promoting mobility, but this requires significant investments by the students and their families because moving abroad is always expensive. The Bologna process is also an important effort for the creation of a unified European higher education area which will promote and improve mobility. At postgraduate level, mobility plays an even more important role. Many Portuguese students, for example, did their PhD thesis either in other European countries or in the US. They were given unique opportunities to learn from and interact with many of the top scientists in the world in a variety of fields.

Stop worrying about the “brain drain”! At the end of their training, many of these people were given further opportunities abroad when they received offers from major institutions. This phenomenon happens in every EU country, and it made us worry about the “brain drain”.

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

We should be bothered if the famous professors were the ones emigrating – those would be big losses. Sending students abroad should always be seen as an investment in the future and an opportunity for renovation.

”

For a long time, we feared losing the brightest people to the US. I strongly believe it is now time to stop worrying about the “brain drain”. Investing in people’s brains is never a loss. Even if some scientists decide to stay abroad, they are likely to act as entry ports into their host country, enabling networking and collaboration. Besides, I think we should be bothered if the famous professors were the ones emigrating – those would be big losses. Sending students abroad should always be seen as an investment in the future and an opportunity for renovation.

Attract the very best What we must do is concentrate our efforts on creating the conditions for the best people to come to the EU, whether they are European, Asian or American. We need to be ambitious and set the bar high. We should not limit ourselves to the ambition of “recovering” those Europeans who go abroad for training. We must be able to attract the very best. Attracting foreigners always has a broad impact both on the scientific system, by bringing in novel ideas, and at socioeconomic level, by introducing social diversity and promoting tourism. It is always highly likely that family and friends will come and visit us when we are abroad.

I spent many years in the US, where I did my PhD and my postdoc, and I was faced with the question of whether I should move back to Europe. I was lucky to have had the possibility to stay in the US, which complicated the decision further. But I chose to come back to my country.

Europe can’t just rely on its “natural appeal” It was a difficult decision, for many reasons, but also because the startup offers in European universities are significantly lower than in the US. Neither did I choose to return for the salary, as salaries in the US are much higher than what I make at the moment. Thus, the big question for EU countries is how to become attractive to people who bear no emotional connection with the country which wishes to hire them. The answer is simple but very hard to achieve – by promoting excellence! This is the only way we can compete with the US. How is the EU promoting mobility, if we still cannot compete with the US in some of the aspects that could be most attractive to young researchers? Is the EU just relying on the fact that the old continent may have some “natural” appeal for some of us who wish to return? This does not seem wise...

F O R M O R E I N F O R M AT I O N

I have now been back in Portugal for over a year and it has been reassuring to watch people from all over the world apply to the institute where I now have my laboratory – the Institute of Molecular Medicine in Lisbon (www.imm.ul.pt). This means we can be competitive and attractive. But we should also be realistic and acknowledge there is still a lot to be done.

www.embo.org http://erc.europa.eu/ http://cordis.europa.eu/mariecurie-actions/

A minimum investment rate in R&D? Do we want the EU to be a “pit stop” where we train people who then move elsewhere? Or do we want to be able to attract people who actually come and stay? I would argue we should aim for both! This is what is done in the US. We must promote mobility as the basis for a collaborative EU landscape, and one that is capable of embracing the big challenges of science. The European Research Council (ERC), which provides support for individual researchers to achieve scientific excellence, or the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) are also excellent examples of established organisations which promote excellence in the field of life sciences in Europe. But more must be done. However, to do all this, we must come back to the underpinning role that financing plays in R&D. Most EU governments understand this. The question is whether they invest enough in science. Should the EU determine a minimum investment in R&D activities for its member states? A major challenge in the EU is to bolster public and private investment in R&D to levels that are similar to those found in the US. This means we need to talk serious money here - and be serious about mobility! •••

M O B I L I T Y I S N O T A N O P T I O N  M O B I L I T Y I S A S I M P O R TA N T F O R S C I E N T I F I C A D VA N C E M E N T A S I S T H E N E E D F O R S O P H I S T I C AT E D E Q U I P M E N T.

< Tiago Fleming Outeiro

Researcher and professor University of Lisbon Portuguese  N° 8  > SHIFT mag

KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH AND SOCIET Y

LAB SCENE INVESTIGATION FOR MORE I N F O R M AT I O N ON LAURENCE’S RESEARCH:

http://www.ulb.ac.be/ ibmm/homeuk_10.html http://www.eucrab.org/

How it all started… When I was a child, I always wanted to be a hairdresser! I think I got the lab bug in my third year at the ULB when I was finally able to choose the course I was interested in (molecular biology). I really enjoyed my final year which was mostly dedicated to laboratory work. The scientific approach is very similar to a criminal investigation. You are facing a crime scene (a scientific question), you make several hypotheses, you gather the proofs and question suspects and witnesses (scientific experiments to test your hypotheses), you interpret the data you have obtained and finally you conclude. It may not sound very scientific but there is also a large part of gut feeling in the scientific approach. You have the feeling that this is the right experiment to do, that this hypothesis is more likely to be correct than another… maybe what I call feeling is in fact experience.

Researcher’s bliss Arriving in the lab in the morning and looking at the results of the experiment you did the day before: this moment always brings a very high degree of excitement! These few minutes in the morning will settle your mood for the entire day (sometimes even for the following nights and weeks). In 20% of the cases, it is pure happiness! The other 80% are just pure frustration. Scientists have to get used

SHIFT mag >  N° 7 

to it. Other exciting moments are the design of new experiments, discussions with colleagues, the elaboration of new models, etc.

… and researcher’s blues But scientists are also human beings, with their own problems, their own questions. How to cope with unstable positions, with the overload of administrative things that are not interesting at all, etc. Science can be quite depressing. A lot of experiments must be done before any result comes up. For months, you can work like hell and nothing new or interesting happens. This is a tough period that every scientist has experienced or will in their career. But as I said before, those little 20% (even less sometimes) provide enough adrenaline to keep you going!

An image deficit Some of my friends see me as a heavy coffee drinker… I think that people outside of science do not realise how competitive our job is (I am talking about science in academia). Scientists are not locked in their ivory tower anymore. We are being evaluated by all sorts of organisations (internal, national and international) based on our publications in scientific journals. Funding is difficult to obtain. Scientists who become lab chiefs have to manage people. In universities, scientists are

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

“

Some of my friends see me as a heavy coffee drinker… I think that people out of science do not realise how competitive our job is. Scientists are not locked in their ivory tower anymore.

”

also teachers. If you are a faculty member, there are all kind of administrative tasks, faculty meetings you have to deal with. A scientific career is multi-faceted, which leaves less and less space for real science. Basically, in Belgium, we have to be as good as other countries with less money and tons of other things to do…

Hooked on science?

Join us… or support us!

I do not think scientific knowledge is an opiate for people who need truth, like religion can be to some. I would even say it is the opposite… Science does not reassure people. It opens new questions every day and most of the time does not provide the answers.

In my opinion, a key function of scientists is to increase general knowledge. Basic science has to be supported. The current trend is to better support applied research for short-term economical reasons. But this will lead to the death of innovation. Useful applications are found by chance. There are numerous examples in the history: Fleming and the discovery of penicillin for instance. Science has to be free from economic constraints. •••

But science is a drug in the sense that scientists are addicted to their work. This is probably due to those bursts of adrenaline we get from time to time…

< Laurence Van Melderen

Erasmus coordinator, Faculty of Sciences IBMM/Université Libre de Bruxelles Belgian

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

1988-2008

Since 1988, the “Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought” has been awarded by the European Parliament to people or organisations – such as Hu Jia, the 2008 laureate – that have made a decisive contribution to the fight for human rights in their respective countries and around the world.

2008 © BELGA/AFP PHOTO/Frederic J BROWN

www.europarl.europa.eu/sakharov

PostScript Laurent van Brussel P.-S: A German artist said she wanted to smoke Kurt Cobain’s ashes to finally free him from the “media merry-go-round”. Is this world serious? Milan Kundera might as well make a brush of Stalin’s moustache to sweep away the unbearable lightness of his being. On 3 November, no more doubt: Barack Obama was on the way towards becoming the first black president of the USA. On 4 November, a doubt after all: is he black, mixed race or simply handsome, fit and suntanned? Is this world serious? Soon, someone will explain to us that an American Indian lives in the White House. After eight years under the cowboy’s heel, it’s in the nature of things. Political rebirth just before physical death: that’s the way Jörg Haider’s paradoxical trajectory came to an end on a highway of Carinthia. Is this world serious? No one is above life’s extremism. When “Fusion Man” flies across the Channel, “Spider Man” falls from the fourth floor of a building in Albacete. Is this world serious? Man has imitated birds from the beginning, but migration management has never been his main strength. And each time he “puts all his eggs in one basket”, the omelette is never too far away...

The main discovery of 2007: war can kill NATO soldiers. What about 2008? We’ve found out that one can lose much money in the stock exchange. Is this world serious? Mark Twain liked to say: “October: this is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks. The others are July, January, September, April, November, May, March, June, December, August, and February.” The average capitalist is just realising that the stock exchange is a game played for money and, therefore, a high-risk one. Since investment banks are not paying anymore, maybe the golden age has come for food, blood and organ banks? Of course… since the world is becoming serious.

SHIFTING WITH

PAUL MAGNETTE TO CONTINUE OUR SERIES OF INTERVIEWS WITH HIGH-PROFILE EUROPEANS MAKING A DIFFERENCE, WE ARE GLAD TO PUBLISH THE VIEWS OF PAUL MAGNETTE, BELGIAN MINISTER OF CLIMATE AND ENERGY AND FORMER EU CONSTITUTIONAL THEORIST. WE ASKED HIM ABOUT THE ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE IN POLICY-MAKING, IN PARTICULAR THE IMPACT OF SCIENTIFIC DEBATES ON ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS. VISIT HTTP://WWW.MAGNETTE.FGOV.BE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON BELGIUM’S CURRENT CLIMATE AND ENERGY POLICY INITIATIVES.

It is by leading the green revolution that Europe can build a competitive economy for the new global environment. Investors must understand where tomorrow’s growth lies and be ready to embrace these changes. By being proactive, Europe will still matter in tomorrow’s world. ARE RESEARCHERS AND SCIENTISTS REALLY CONSULTED BY POLITICIANS? HOW VALUABLE IS THEIR EXPERTISE IN A WORLD DICTATED BY OPINION POLLS?

“

In times of instability and crisis, politicians need expertise more than ever.

”

I think that in times of instability and crisis, politicians need expertise more than ever. We can see that in the US. Barack Obama has decided to call upon a wide range of experts to draw up and implement his economic recovery plan. To design the future of energy policy in Belgium, I have asked a group of experts to study the ideal energy mix and make a list of proposals to the government. On such technical issues, the political decision-maker must be able to rely on scientific knowledge. THE ISSUE OF BIOFUELS HAS SHOWN THAT DEEP DISAGREEMENTS CAN EXIST WITHIN THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD ITSELF. HOW DOES THE POLITICIAN CHOOSE?

The best solution is to take such alternatives through a

WE ARE OFTEN TOLD THAT EUROPE’S FUTURE PROSPERITY CAN “sustainability test”, setting sustainability criteria that will ONLY BE BUILT ON A GREEN AND KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMY. determine whether they can be legitimately produced and IS THIS SUSTAINABLE WHEN COMPETING WITH EMERGING distributed. The EU is about to adopt such criteria for renewable GLOBAL POWERS WHO MAY HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARDS?

energy and fuel quality.

Europe must face an important economic crisis. Like many casual observers and economists, I’m convinced that Europe can overcome this crisis by investing in alternative energy and new technologies. These sectors will provide tomorrow’s jobs and stimulate economic growth.

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

These criteria allow for a comprehensive approach, taking into account not only environmental risks (such as the ones linked to biofuels), but also social and economic factors which are important too.

SHIFTING WITH

 Officials attending a plenary session during the International Conference on Biofuels, in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on 20 November 2008. This conference involved delegates from 40 countries to consider the issues of development, food security, trade and climate change.

I’m in favour of using the same approach for genetically modified products. This would allow the government to gather independent opinion and data on important issues such as biosecurity, while again taking into account the social and economic impact of any decision. NUCLEAR ENERGY IS ANOTHER INTERESTING EXAMPLE: IT SEEMS YESTERDAY’S MISTAKES ARE TODAY’S CHANCES, AND VICE-VERSA. CAN THE SITUATION STILL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE?

Today, Belgium cannot revise its “nuclear exit” legislation. The government has decided to be pragmatic and wait for the recommendations of a group of national and international experts. They will put together and analyse the conclusions of four recent studies on energy policy in Belgium. This will allow the government to choose the right energy mix based on three fundamental principles: security of supply, competitiveness and respect for the environment. The draft report is expected for June 2009 and should be finalised by the end of the year following political discussions. The aim is to build, together with the citizens, a consensus on the best energy mix for Belgium. •••

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH AND SOCIET Y

BOOST YOUR ERASMUS, GET INVOLVED ERASMUS – the European passport for student mobility – makes it possible for European students to spend one or two semesters abroad in another European country. Former and current Erasmusers share a unique experience and opportunity to immerse themselves into the diversity of the destination country and of their mates’ home country. Originally an academic experience, Erasmus is also an incentive to foster and spread the European spirit and identity. A new generation is born. I was an Erasmus student myself. Strasbourg was the town where I landed. My stay was rich and its outcomes long-lasting like the creation of cafebabel.com, the first panEuropean online media. I am drawing on my own experience, as it shows that students should fully take advantage of this year abroad. Here are 5 golden ‘to do’ rules which should prove useful, whether you are now, or were, a student.

1# Integrate Run away from bunches of students of your nationality and avoid the “tortilla syndrome”. Imagine a bunch of 40 Spanish-speaking students – among which I was the only outsider – that had to go through all the bars in Rome to find one with enough space and that finally always ended up in the same insipid botellón. To become a real Erasmus insider, you have got to know locals and mingle as much as you can. From the moment your plane touches down, you are given this chance – share a flat with locals, take part in your university’s sports activities, and possibly go to lectures.

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

2# Accept your accent as your main asset Because integrating should not lead to a mimetic parody, accept yourself as an exotic asset in this new land. As you do not obviously look like a local, do not get ridiculous trying to have the extreme “I’m-in” attitude.

“

4# Get involved, be creative! Elaborate on your personal interests and hobbies and put them at the heart of your local involvement. Whatever you are interested in, you may gain from it, e.g. writing for a university newsletter, getting involved in social or humanitarian activities, etc.

The European Union should definitely invest in an “Erasmus for all” programme.

Do not be afraid of your accent and cultivate it, as it is your main asset, as I was advised by a cute Strasbourger. Share your culture, such as food and music, as well. Organising parties has a high mingling value and is also a good way of sharing your own origins.

3# Be careful with clichés Do not pass fast value judgments. Do not fall into idealism either. Erasmus is a great fascinating golden cage you can easily get trapped in. Your foreign idealistic insight may be at the opposite end of local resentment. Take the chance to get rid of your clichés and preconceived ideas (“in case they don’t know how to cook pasta”, “they are too cold”, etc.) and to open your mind instead. Therefore, you should also avoid taking for granted that the place you are living in does not represent the country as a whole. There may be local and regional discrepancies. You should also avoid comparing your own country with your host country. Give your hosts a chance and you will find treasures there.

”

Also, benefit from basic things, e.g. Erasmus parties, which can be a real wealth of talent and resource. You can draw from them, find ways to develop new ideas and launch activities with your Erasmus mates throughout Europe. Cafebabel.com is such an initiative with Erasmus roots that was launched by mates from all over Europe who shared a similar vision, as well as a common prospect.

5# Immerse yourself into this new environment Being far from home is no easy thing. You never expected to get so far from your friends and family. You simply do not want any gap due to distance and may even keep hanging on to your parents through several daily phone calls, keeping messenger online to catch your friends at any time, etc. However, you now share this “where’s home?” feeling. Therefore, immerse yourself into your new reality, do not get scared of being curious. Be as curious as you can, while being aware of your own differences. After all, you applied for Erasmus, didn’t you? Thus, experience and enjoy your stay!

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

Epilogue Back in your routine, you may feel empty. How surprising after such an experience that is said to be capable of transforming one’s life. Be aware of this and do not be astonished if you suffer from post-Erasmus depression. This is also part of the whole Erasmus process. However, you have become a true Erasmus insider. You belong to a community that shares a common feeling of what is Europe today. You also drew from your Erasmus mates’ experience and cultures; they now

belong to you too. Lucky you, you have several places you can call yours throughout Europe.

But so far this experience is not shared by our leaders and is still the dream of one generation. •••

The future Now, just stop for a second. And imagine a continent where every single European citizen – student or worker – would be offered an experience like this, even if only for a couple of months. The European Union should definitely invest in an “Erasmus for all” programme. This would foster both cultural diversity and business development by breaking down barriers that are still dividing us.

< Adriano Farano Co-founder of Cafe Babel Paris Italian

Adriano Farano is the co-founder and editor of the European online newsmagazine cafebabel. com and author of the multilingual blog eurogeneration.cafebabel.com.

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

RESERVOIR BLOGS WELCOME TO RESERVOIR BLOGS - EUROPE’S WEIRDEST BLOG REVIEW, GATHERING, JUST FOR YOU, ALL THE STRANGEST TITBITS FOUND ON THE EUROBLOGOSPHERE. ONCE AGAIN, MR SHIFT WILL WHIP OUT HIS FINGER AND STICK IT ON BLOGS TO SQUEEZE THE JUICIEST AND CRACK OPEN THE NUTTIEST FOR YOUR DISCERNING PALATES.

EU citizens, do not worry anymore, you will not have to eat perfect-looking bananas, as in the future the physical appearance of fruit and vegetables will not matter as much as it used to. Indeed, as Nosemonkey explains on his blog (http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog): “[…] more silly EU regulations bite the dust, as a bunch of rules on the physical appearance of fruit and vegetables are set to go the way of the Dodo.”

European Union or Banana Union?

Thank God! We are free again to eat a dodgy looking but perfectly sound cucumber. After all, it is the quality of food that matters, not rather silly, but it’s surely better than trying how it looks. This shows the European Union to cope with umpteen different standards can learn from its mistakes and scrape some for umpteen different countries.” incomprehensible rules. Anyway, the fact that the EU realised some Nosemonkey talks about two EU regulations of its policies were silly and not serving in particular, one on bananas and another the interest of EU citizens proves that the EU one on cucumbers. “Regulation (EC) is no Banana Republic or, better said, no 2257/94 – a great read, by the way – stated Banana Union… that they [bananas] must be ‘free from malformation or abnormal curvature of the fingers’, but failed to specify what this meant Anyone but Barroso […]. There was a fun bit about ‘the grade, … Or are we sure it is not a Banana Union after i.e. the measurement, in millimetres, of the all? Mr Shift would not regard fruit regulations thickness of a transverse section of the as important as the appointment of a European fruit between the lateral faces and the Commission President. And in the Commission middle, perpendicularly to the longitudinal presidency field, the EU seems, at times, to be functioning like a Banana Republic. José axis’ though…” Nosemonkey then admits “[…] the Manuel Barroso will almost certainly be relevel of detail in these regulations is silly appointed as President in 2009. Why? Simply and unnecessary – of that there can be because the EU lacks true opposition. Almost no doubt. That’s precisely why they’re everyone is backing Barroso for a second term.

referendums on EU questions. He has no positive agenda for the European Commission. Plus, with European elections on the horizon, we think it’s damaging that it’s just assumed that Barroso will be chosen for a further term.” They also declare: “The hope for an interesting EP election in 2009 rested with the PES. But they have blown it […]. Portuguese PM Socrates and Spanish PM Zapatero have both given their backing to Barroso for a second term. Let’s just make it clear: Zapatero and Socrates are from member parties of the PES, and Barroso is a conservative. So the PES is approaching the EP elections having backed the opposition’s candidate. What the hell is wrong with them?” According to the three bloggers “there are a whole bunch of candidates that […] could do a better job than Barroso. Here, in no particular order, is a selection: Pascal Lamy, Margot Wallström, Guy Verhofstadt, David Miliband.”

This is why three bloggers started the Mr Shift does not know if they would do a However, he also acknowledges that the website “Anyone but Barroso” (http://www. better job, but the fact that there is just one anyonebutbarroso.eu/en): Jon Worth, Jan harmonisation of standards EU-wide is candidate for the Commission presidency is Seifert and Valéry-Xavier Lentz. important for farmers. Thus, they do not quite surprising. have to ensure that their products meet They explain: “We don’t like José Manuel 27 different quality standards: “The EU’s Barroso. There are plenty of reasons for this. As Jean Quatremer points out in his blog ones [regulations] may be too detailed and He just stood by as 3 countries voted no in (http://bruxelles.blogs.liberation.fr/coulisses): scrapping them.”

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

RESERVOIR BLOGS He then talks about Tebbit’s proposal: “Giscard may well find the EU more likely to unravel into a new West European Republic of 6 or 10 states willing to sacrifice their identities to gain the undoubted advantages that the United Kingdom has enjoyed in its own union of England, Scotland, Ulster and Wales, and 15 or 20 still sovereign states in a new treaty relationship.”

“The campaign for the 2009 European elections might be as thrilling as the one preceding the designation of Fidel Castro’s successor as head of Cuba”. Did the EU actually take Oscar Wilde’s suggestion literally: “Better the rule of One, whom all obey, than to let clamorous demagogues betray our freedom with the kiss of anarchy”? Maybe… Maybe not… But the system needs to change if we want to restore European citizens’ trust in the European institutions.

Together for better or for worse On Re:Europa (http://reeuropa.blogspot. com), the blogger rz states Norman Tebbit’s vision on how the EU should be organised. He describes it as “a constructive vision for Eurosceptics”. Rz declares: “One should note here that Norman Tebbit himself is a Eurosceptic, who believes that Britain has no place inside a federal European Union. But in contrast to other Europhobes […] he does not simply throw dirt, but presents a positive vision how the EU should be structured.”

In other words, according to Norman Tebbit: “The task for the Tory leadership, the Eurosceptics, […] is to crystallise the vision of Mrs Thatcher's Bruges speech into the architecture of a new European treaty, one that would constitute a framework within which sovereign states would co-operate with a European Republic formed of those nations willing to enter a complete political union of their own.” Sovereign states and a European Republic come together for better or for worse. Interesting idea. However, didn't John Dickinson once say “by uniting we stand, by dividing we fall”? And as Nelson Mandela observed: “The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall.” And God knows this is difficult! So is it really that interesting to have one European republic cooperating with some divided independent states? Is it worth a try? Or is it better to continue on the same track of a united Europe? Mr Shift does not have the answer. However, rz is right when he says “it would be a really positive development if Europhobes would present a vision of how they think the EU should be structured in the future along the lines of this article [that is, Norman Tebbit’s – ed.]. This would finally enable us to have a constructive debate about the EU.” At long last!

“Cultural fascism”

of Telegraph journalist Bruno Waterfield entitled Belgium 'placed on democracy watch list'. He notes: “The global champions of cultural fascism have turned to sneering on themselves: Belgium has banned three elected mayors from office for speaking French.” He subsequently states a paragraph in Waterfield’s article: “The COE [Council of Europe – ed.] has demanded that the mayors be immediately appointed and called for a review of Belgium's linguistic laws that have been used by Flemish nationalists to ban the use of the French language in municipalities around Brussels, home to the EU.” Joe ends by saying: “Good luck with all that”. Mr Shift also thinks French should be banned in Canada, Catalan in Spain, Corsican in France or Mapudungun spoken by the Mapuche communities in Chile. This way people will learn to be respectful to the rest of their country and will lose their culture to the main national culture. That is how languages are lost and how central authorities still oppress the diversity of cultures in their country. Very intelligent and very interesting! How can people be so stupid? How can you ban people from speaking their own language or another language in their own country? Isn’t the variety of cultures what makes a country even more interesting? Isn’t that diversity significantly rewarding? And anyway we should all agree with Eugene McCarthy: “As long as the differences and diversities of mankind exist, democracy must allow for compromise, for accommodation, and for the recognition of differences.” Thank you and see you next time!

Mr Shift

On ¡No Pasarán! (http://no-pasaran.blogspot. com), Joe Noory comments on an article  N° 8  > SHIFT mag

KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH AND SOCIET Y

IF YOU CAN’T BEAT THEM, JOIN THEM!

lobal university ranking schemes are analytical devices and governing technologies that travel across space and get placed in reports, ministerial briefing notes, articles, presentations, newspapers, magazine stories, etc. These then generate effects; they provide inspiration and legitimation to those who seek to reconfigure our institutions and systems of higher education and research. Ranking schemes are also associated with another logic – that of marketmaking, for they are increasingly used to sell magazines and newspapers, complementary services, fuel the establishment of firms like London/Paris/Singapore-based QS Quacquarelli Symonds, and provide indirect forms of recurring revenue for Thomson Reuters (developer of the ISI Web of Knowledge).

European anxiety It is now abundantly clear that Europe has become destabilised by global university ranking schemes. The key external impulse for the destablisation process was the establishment of Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Academic Ranking of World Universities in 2003, and The Times Higher (now known as Times Higher-QS World University Rankings) in 2004. These ranking schemes generated substantial anxiety, in multiple quarters, given how poorly European universities (apart from those in the UK) fared in the outcome relative to US universities. How could Europe, guided by the Lisbon Strategy, become the “most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”, with such poorly ranked universities?

Ideological unease Reactions in Europe to the emergence and diffusion of the first two “global” ranking schemes came quick, yet substantial counter-movements or alternatives were slow to emerge. In my opinion, the European response was hindered because of four likely factors: (a) an inward-oriented concentration on the development of the European Higher Education Area (formally launched in 1999), and the European Research Area (formally launched in 2000) which only opened up “space” for broader thinking post 2006/7. (b) an ideological unease in facing up to the nature of competition with respect to higher education and research, of which benchmarking and ranking is an integral part. (c) an infatuation, in elite European circles, with the top-ranked US Ivy League universities (aka an implicit acceptance of one possibly legitimate form of American exceptionalism). (d) the limited role of high-ranking European (mainly UK) universities, especially their leaders, in questioning the schema that they themselves benefit from. In other words, informed and well-placed leadership, on behalf of Europe,

F O R M O R E I N F O R M AT I O N

GlobalHigherEd http://globalhighered.wordpress.com/ Multi-scalar governance technologies vs recurring revenue: the dual logics of the rankings phenomenon http://globalhighered.wordpress. com/2008/11/30/multi-scalargovernance-vs-recurring-revenue/ Euro angsts, insights and actions regarding global university ranking schemes http://globalhighered.wordpress. com/2008/07/06/euro-angsts-universityranking-schemes/

“

How could Europe, guided by the Lisbon Strategy, become the “most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world" with such poorly ranked universities?

”

was lacking from those holding Europe’s most advanced understanding of bibliometrics. Over the course of the last two years, especially in 2008, we have witnessed a literal avalanche of European engagements with the global rankings phenomenon, though the objectives of such initiatives vary: from the critical through to the transformative, we are witnessing a new-found desire to rank, in one form or another. This desire acknowledges that ranking schemes are multiscalar governance technologies. Equally, if not more important, it has become clear to European elites that ranking schemes act as deep geopolitical and geoeconomic vehicles with considerable persuasive power in a global knowledge economy.

The ranking topic is not about to disappear

Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Academic Ranking of World Universities http://www.arwu.org/ The Times Higher-QS World University Rankings http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/ hybrid.asp?typeCode= 142&pubCode=1&navcode=118

In an evolving political context, given state control over higher education budgets and the re-launched Lisbon agenda drive, Europe’s rankers of ranking schemes were propelled into action from 2006/7 onwards in trebuchet-like fashion. 2010 is, after all, a key target date for a myriad of European scale assessments. A flurry of events, ad-hoc groupings (e.g. the EU Expert Group on Assessment of University-based Research), institutions, and new ranking schemes (e.g. the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH)), emerged, and there is no sign of any let-up.

In November 2008, for example, a major conference was held in Paris (“International comparison of education systems: a European model?”). This large event was sponsored by France and the European Commission’s DG Education and Culture and its main objective was “to bring to the fore the strengths and weaknesses of the different international and European education systems, while highlighting the need for regular and objective assessment of the reforms undertaken by European Member States by means of appropriate indicators”. In addition, the same DG is about to launch a call for the development of a new Europeanscale ranking methodology that places more weight on education quality and emphasis on individual departments rather than whole universities. The rankings topic is not about to disappear. Let us hope that the controversies, debates and research (current and future) inspire coordinated and rigorous European initiatives that will shed more light on this new form of de facto regional and global governance. Why? If Europe does not do it, no one else will, at least in a manner that recognises the diverse contributions that higher education can and should make to development processes at a range of scales. Questions remain, though, about how much light will be shed on the nature of global university ranking schemes, what proposals or alternatives might emerge and how the various currents of thought in Europe will converge or diverge as some consensus is sought. •••

> Kris Olds Professor, Department of Geography University of Madison, Wisconsin, USA Canadian

Kris Olds is co-editor of the blog GlobalHigherEd (http://globalhighered.wordpress.com)

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

IN OUR BRAND NEW FEATURE THE CLASH, TWO CONTRASTING OPINIONS WILL SQUARE UP TO EACH OTHER ON A HOTLY DEBATED TOPIC EVERY THREE MONTHS. WE START WITH A DEBATE ON EUROPEANA, EUROPE’S AMBITIOUS DIGITAL LIBRARY.

ROT

U Victor FLE Editor

HOW ABOUT LISTENING TO YOUR USERS? On 20 November 2008, an exciting new online library was launched by Mr Barroso, the quietly active (or actively quiet?) president of the European Commission. A few hours later, Europeana was taken offline due to server overload, with a message on the homepage announcing a relaunch in mid-December.

PR fiasco for a noble cause Perhaps a three-week delay is a small price to pay for such a noble project: making all of Europe’s cultural contribution to the world available online and free of charge. But a first question comes to mind: why not publish these digitised archives through existing platforms such as Google and Youtube? One possible answer is that these platforms’ commercial nature and user subcultures do not fit with the essence of the Europeana project. Fair enough. What is less understandable for such an ambitious project is the unmanageable gap between online infrastructure and traffic on the opening day. Victim of its own success? Perhaps, but also of an approach that is typically European, or “continental” as the Brits would put it, and particulatly pronounced when France is in the driving seat (on the day of its launch, 50% of Europeana’s content was in French).

SHIFT mag >  N° 8 

An old industrial recipe… The idea is that enlightened public institutions, free from commercial imperatives and with only the citizens’ best interests in mind, are in an ideal position to initiate long-term projects that will benefit society as a whole – including the economy. There have been numerous successful examples of this approach: Airbus, the TGV, France’s nuclear park and technology, etc. No private actor could have provided the necessary level of investment and long-term planning for such large-scale programmes. And in the end, they all did create industrial innovation and excellence. But when it comes to new technologies, another approach is needed. In the early 1980s, the French government launched its own version of the internet. The Minitel allowed French households to access online pages, public and commercial, in black and white. There were even erotic sites with pixellised drawings and texts that could be consulted for the price of an expensive phone call. This huge public investment worked well for around 15 years, but came to a spectacular end with the rise of the internet. The reason? The less flexible top-down approach that had worked so well for industrial projects could

The

CLAS

not resist the bottom-up wave of new technologies.

Putting users first, the only way forward Unfortunately, it seems that Europeana suffers from a similar flaw: a great idea by a public institution that is not sufficiently user-oriented. It is all very well promoting the common good regardless of commercial interests, but one cannot separate the common good from individual tastes and preferences. Not testing the demand and market potential of such a project smacks of careless arrogance (“we know what you need and how much, trust us”). What next for Europeana? Does it still have enough credibility to find a place in the world of online libraries? Its value is undeniable, but its management must evolve radically. It could perhaps draw inspiration from a similar non-profit and successful venture: Wikipedia (talk about a user-oriented project!). In 1988, Bruno Lassato summed up the Minitel experiment as follows: “Some say the whole world envies our programme. I don’t know whether they envy it, but I know for a fact that they’re not buying it”. Europeana may not be for sale, but nor is it envied just yet. •••

David MA

Deputy e

ditor

RQUIE

INVENTING THE TOOLS OF TOMORROW’S EDUCATION Granted, the launch of Europeana has been a major failure. Haste, lack of preparation, incompetence, pettiness… everything has been said and some of those critics have been justified.

Massive public interest

In a way, it is almost laughable. Most of Europeana’s initiators are French and, thus, cannot say they had not been warned. The last two big public website launches in France (the National Institute of Audiovisual portal www.ina.fr and the National Institute of Geography www.geoportail.fr) have both experienced serious bugs the day they were put online due to huge (and unexpected) traffic. Given the nature of the Europeana project and the ambitions of its creators, the technical dimension should have been taken more seriously. Be that as it may, this massive interest of the public is very good news. It may have been used as a smoke screen by the European Commission in its not so lowprofile reaction, but the success of the launch

is nevertheless undeniable. Once the service reopens, it will be able to build on a solid user base. This may convince many European cultural institutions who were uncertain about offering digitised material to Europeana because they were doubtful about the potential audience. It could also encourage European institutions to invest more in the digitisation of the continent’s cultural heritage. For the moment, Brussels has planned to spend 120 million euros on this project for the period 2009-2010. The budget for Google Book Search is still a mystery but probably tops this figure easily. The confidence vote by Europeana users is all the more welcome.

Organising knowledge Regarding the rivalry with Google, the two projects have long been portrayed as competitors. It is partly true. Both have the ambition to give online access to a broad collection of digitised works. But while Google only contains books, Europeana offers paintings, movies, music and lots of other documents. For the moment, the site “only” displays 2.5 million documents (as opposed

to the 7 million books available in the Google library), but this number should go up to 10 million items by 2010. Google is also facing a problem of copyright that Europeana should avoid. The Mountain View giant may have recently won a battle against editors and publishers in the United States, but it surely has not with their European counterparts. The risk is, for Google, to only have minor copyrighted items to offer, like cheap travel guides for example. Finally, and more importantly, the logics behind the two projects are radically different. Google is surely not devoting itself to digitisation by pure philanthropy. Behind the library lies the potentially juicy market of electronic books. Not to mention Google’s current money-spinning ad-words business that fits well with Books Search. Instead of Google algorithms, Europeana is offering a real selection of relevant objects. The aim of the European service is not commercial, it is the organisation of knowledge in the digital era and inventing the tools of tomorrow’s education. Isn’t this worth a bit of patience and support? •••

 N° 8  > SHIFT mag

EUROPE TALKS TO BRUSSELS

COMING UP SOON...

THE NEW SHIFTMAG WEBSITE!

www.shiftmag.eu Discover exclusive online features

F O R I N F O R M AT I O N ON ADVERTISING IN S H I F T M A G , CONTACT ANDRES BELLEMANS (andres.bellemans@tipik.eu) FLORENCE ORTMANS (florence.ortmans@tipik.eu)

Get SHIFT Mag articles online

React and take part in the debate

Explore our european web selection

The quantity of information used and produced is growing steadily, imposing new constraints on companies. For more than ten years, SWORD has been providing Enterprise Content Management solutions at the leading edge of best practices. Services offered by SWORD cover the entire solution implementation process: advice, support and technical expertise are combined to offer an integrated approach.

Global leader in intelligent IT solutions SWORD is active in key sectors of the global economy, such as finance, health or energy. The excellence of our services is acknowledged worldwide. The value of an organisation rests on the information it creates and manages continuously. With SWORD, information becomes your main asset.

www.sword-group.com

Time to Tipik

Helping you to reach them www.tipik.eu Avenue de Tervueren 270 Tervurenlaan B-1150 Bruxelles / Brussel Tel. +32.2.235.56.70 Fax. +32.2.235.56.99 ISO 9001 certified Tipik is a Sword Group Company