Science & Policymaking Archives

  • The EU’s dangerous biomass delusion

    Energy 19-10-2016

    Bioenergy advocates claim that Europe’s forests are well managed and don’t contribute to global warming. Yet, biomass production in Europe is projected to rely more and more on materials that have a high risk of increasing greenhouse gas emissions, writes Linde Zuidema.

  • The Scientific Advice Mechanism – Is it better regulation?


    Ultimately, the system of scientific advice should be systemic, synced to political timeframes, and have a say not only in policy proposals but on political agenda setting. Philip Hines talks us through the Commission’s Scientific Advise Mechanism.

  • EU’s sunbed safety assessment clouded by bias

    Health 01-09-2016

    An upcoming assessment by a European Commission committee on the risks of UV radiation and sunbeds is hamstrung by in-built bias and a failure to comprehensively address all the issues, warns Frank Harbusch.

  • What does an innovation agenda mean for consumers?


    Innovation and consumer protection are not opposites. Indeed there is huge potential to use innovation to deliver safer products that benefit consumers, writes Monique Goyens.

  • Europe’s broken biofuels policy

    Energy 14-08-2016

    Public policy should be built on firm foundations. Objective analysis, verifiable facts and solid science are good starting points, but that was absent in biofuels policy-making, writes Dick Roche.

  • Commission’s endocrine disruptor plan is illegal, inadequate and woefully late

    Climate change 05-08-2016

    European Commission draft rules to identify and ultimately ban endocrine disrupters are illegal because they clash with existing pesticide and biocide regulations, Alice Bernard writes. The environmental lawyer warned that EU judges could throw out the changes to the long-awaited scientific criteria for the chemicals.

  • Time for a balanced debate on biofuels

    Agrifood 20-07-2016

    Public policy should be based on verifiable facts, rational analysis and, where possible, on solid science, writes Dick Roche.

  • The EU’s confused evidence processes for identifying endocrine disruptors


    A group of scientists has written to the European Commission to voice concerns about burden of proof and confused evidence requirements to identify and classify endocrine disruptors under the PPP and Biocides Regulations.

  • European Bee Week: What the EU should do for bees and biodiversity

    Agrifood 16-06-2016

    While it has already taken some action, the EU still has a lot of work to do to protect bees and other pollinators and, thus, improve food security and preserve biodiversity, writes Daniel Penev.

  • Sustainable consumption and Germany’s response

    Sustainable Development 07-06-2016

    Moving towards a sustainable consumption model cannot rely solely on consumer habits and attitudes: the formulation of policy is where real change will be made. Germany has a golden opportunity to be a pioneer in this area, write Matthias Ruchser and Ingmar Streese.

  • Disrupted: The endocrine disruptor debate


    The debate on hormone disruptors in the EU is more political than scientific. A decision to ignore the question of potency would cause needless disruption to regulators, industries and consumers, writes Christopher Borgert.

  • A bright outlook for the cloud

    Digital 31-05-2016

    If data is the oil of the 21st century digital economy, then cloud computing is its engine. Europe needs to make sure that its digital motor is running properly to reap the benefits from future data driven innovation, big data and the internet of things, writes Elena Zvarici.

Want to know what's going on in the EU Capitals daily? Subscribe now to our new 9am newsletter.