7. Foster Context-sensitive Science Communication

Actions for RPOs & Institutional Support officers

  • Facilitate science communication in diverse spaces and invite society into the spaces of science, ensuring the inclusion of communities and groups across both social and geographical contexts
  • Increase the breadth and diversity of science communication and communicators, to be representative of the diversity of society.
  • Insist on broad communication of science and facilitate the availability and discoverability of science

Actions for Mediators

  • Work to enhance the communicative value and reach of communication by curating research without relying on jargon
  • Be mindful that individual attitudes and perceptions of science are key for the reception of and interaction with science communication and work to bridge divides based on values and attitudes
  • Tailor efforts to specific audiences and take care to target communities both proximate and distant to science using their preferred information channels

Actions for Researchers

  • Be aware that the aspects of research that are most salient for science and society are not necessarily the same and be willing to engage with questions and concerns that arise from public debate.
  • Engage with the public in their preferred spaces, to learn, understand and frame communication in ways that will be accessible and attractive to audiences

Actions for RFOs, National Policymakers, and the European Commission

  • Be attentive to science communication as a societally impactful outcome of research and facilitate and incentivise these activities
  • Support the establishment and maintenance of science communication spaces and organisations and emphasise the importance of both deliberation and dissemination
  • Push to increase diversity in science communication and science communication audiences in terms of individuals, venues, and formats
  • Ensure that the results of research are available to broader society and relevant stakeholders in a format they find useful
  • Work cross-institutionally to facilitate cooperation of science communication, education, and science debates

1.  Align Principles and Practices of Research Integrity

Actions for RPOs & Institutional support officers

  • Implement clear guidelines, codes of conduct, and policies on research integrity and ethical standards to ensure alignment with existing national and European frameworks and to promote responsible research practices
  • Acknowledge and address conflicting institutional imperatives and cross- pressures between research integrity (RI) principles and practices, such as tensions between open science, security concerns, and compliance with GDPR
  • Commit to revising research assessment policies in order to adopt more inclusive, diverse, responsible, and effective measures, with greater emphasis on qualitative evaluation
  • Commit to fostering a culture of research integrity that promotes inclusion and diversity by engaging researchers in training and actions for integrity in science
  • Ensure that institutional infrastructures and transparent lines of responsibility are in place to address detrimental research practices while respecting the principles of confidentiality and fairness
  • Ensure adequate administrative support for researchers throughout the research process and scientific projects, covering areas such as budget management, external collaboration and relations, and data management. Create awareness about existing resources
  • Provide continuous responsible conduct of research (RCR) training and counselling to researchers at all career stages and to other RI professionals working in the institution
  • Recognize and address differences in how research integrity, ethics, open science, and related concepts are understood and interpreted across national contexts and scientific communities, including broader societal perspectives
  • Organise cross-professional training for researchers, data protection officers, and communicators

Actions for Mediators & Researchers

  • Be committed to transparently assessing and communicating the credibility of scientific information, including instances of irresponsible practices, to help demonstrate the integrity and accountability of the scientific system
  • Incorporate research integrity in awareness raising, capacity building and training activities of students at all levels, e.g. in science communication and methods training
  • Ensure familiarity with established research integrity and ethics policies, principles, and codes of conduct within the relevant field, and commit to actively implementing and promoting these principles and practices

Actions for RFOs & National Policymakers

  • Implement clear and updated guidelines, codes of conduct and promote shared research integrity standards across European countries, institutions and funding organisations while taking contextual factors into account
  • Encourage research and funding institutions to commit to the CoARA principles. Promote the use of qualitative indicators of integrity-related contributions such as responsible mentoring, ethical leadership in collaborative projects, FAIR data production, public engagement, and responsible science communication
  • Require statements on research integrity considerations in grant proposals and project reporting to ensure that research integrity is considered, implemented and monitored
  • Support the sharing of best practices for fostering responsible research, with a focus on effective dissemination, meaningful collaboration, and avoiding superficial ‘tick-box’ approaches
  • Support the appointment of dedicated integrity and ethics officers in research institutions

Actions for the European Commission

  • Map existing tensions within European research systems and launch a targeted consultation with Member States, research funders, and academic institutions to document: a) researcher dilemmas in applying integrity principles (e.g., data sharing versus GDPR), b) misalignments between stated principles (e.g., transparency, rigor, and collaboration) and actual evaluation practices, and c) varying definitions and interpretations of “research integrity” and “trust” across disciplines and countries
  • Establish an intersectoral European working group comprising representatives from research-performing organisations, funding agencies, data protection and legal experts, ethics committees, and civil society organisations. Task the group with developing scenarios to reconcile competing principles (e.g., security versus openness) across diverse research contexts
  • Develop a contextualized and adaptive policy framework by defining a European baseline of shared integrity principles, including procedural integrity, respect for persons, transparency, and accountability
  • Develop and implement differentiated research integrity protocols tailored to specific sectors, disciplines, and methodological contexts, such as health, climate, social sciences, and artificial intelligence (AI)
  • Introduce proportionality clauses in open science policies to account for varying levels of data sensitivity and risk
  • Support the reform of researcher assessment and merit systems and encourage Member States and institutions to commit to the CoARA principles
  • Promote the use of qualitative indicators of integrity-related contributions, such as responsible mentoring, ethical leadership in collaborative projects, FAIR data production, public engagement, and responsible science communication

2. Ensure Transparency in Collaboration with External Interests

Actions for RPOs & Institutional support officers

  • Implement clear guidelines for identifying and mitigating conflicts of interest, and establish institutional support structures for managing and communicating about such conflicts
  • Implement quality and legal advice mechanisms to support researchers navigate collaborations with external parties
  • Establish transparent guidelines to uphold impartiality and freedom of research in the context of external collaborations. Provide clear procedures for ensuring responsible practices across different categories of external collaboration
  • Safeguard the independence of science and promote public dialogue on the role and implications of private funding in universities and research organisations

Actions for Mediators & Researchers

  • Ensure that the arm’s-length principle is upheld to enable independent decisions and to avoid any doubt about individual integrity, independence, and impartiality
  • Establish clear agreements outlining the division of responsibilities and decision-making authority within each collaboration and ensure that these agreements are aligned with the nature of the collaboration (e.g. research- based public sector consultancy, co-funded research, etc.)
  • Transparently and responsibly disclose funding sources and any interest- driven aspects of work and research to ensure independence from external influences, including political pressures. These principles should also guide science mediation and communication practices
  • Promote transparency and strengthen self-regulation mechanisms in science communication, ensuring that communication is guided by integrity, independence, and disclosure of conflicts of interest

Actions for RFOs, national policymakers and the European Commission

  • Secure transparency in funding and cooperation agreements
  • Implement quality and legal advice mechanisms to support researchers navigate collaborations with external parties
  • Ensure funding programmes that are explicitly insulated from partisan or interest-driven agendas, supporting open-ended research outcomes that are not dominated by the policy interests of current governing bodies
  • Support the development of a public discourse around research funding and collaboration with societal interests

3. Recognize and Mitigate the Politicization of Science

Actions for RPOs & Institutional Support Officers

  • Implement clear institutional guidelines to create protective environments for researchers and safeguard freedom of research, particularly in highly politicized areas of research
  • Establish dedicated communication response teams to support researchers in navigating external and politicized reactions and pressures
  • Commit to promoting and protecting the principles and practices of freedom of research to ensure the independence of research, innovation, teaching, and communication from external influences
  • Implement clear guidelines and support mechanisms for researchers providing scientific expertise in science-informed policy-making

Actions for Mediators & Researchers

  • Ensure close attention is given to how science is represented, and how scientific information is verified, received, and used
  • Contribute to clarifying the distinct roles of science and politics in society to foster greater coherence in their interaction
  • Acknowledge and display transparency regarding the limits of individual expertise, and clearly communicate the capacity in which a viewpoint is presented, for instance as a subject-matter expert, private individual, or specific advocate

Actions for RFOs

  • Commit to promoting and protecting the principles and practices of freedom of research to ensure the independence of research, innovation, teaching, and communication from external influences
  • Promote the adoption of shared institutional guidelines to create protective environments for researchers and safeguard freedom of research, particularly in highly politicized areas of research
  • Launch a collaborative thematic initiative among public and private research foundations to examine their role and influence in safeguarding freedom of research and to identify potential support mechanisms

Actions for national policymakers and the European Commission

  • Strengthen bridge-building between research communities and the political system to enhance the uptake of research-informed policymaking
  • Implement strategies and procedures to ensure transparent, science- informed policy-making within science-for-policy ecosystems, including measures to prevent the misrepresentation of scientific findings
  • Assess how efforts to make science more responsive and actionable may lead to public perceptions of government pressure or interference in scientific activity, which could be perceived as a risk to scientific integrity
  • Launch a targeted consultation with Member States, research funders, and academic institutions to document the current state, challenges, and monitoring practices related to the rights and responsibilities associated with freedom of scientific research
  • Launch a Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on the politicization of science and its consequences for public trust in the uptake and benefits of research and innovation

8. Enhance Awareness of the Nature and Principles of Science

Actions for Mediators

  • Make the principles and processes of science explicit in science communication to ensure transparency and understanding. Communicate the scientific process, its challenges and iterative learning
  • Highlight remaining questions, uncertainties, and avenues of future inquiry when communicating science to the public
  • Ensure that sources of information are made explicit, to facilitate openness and transparency of research
  • Ensure that science communication is aligned with the highest ethical and integrity standards

Actions for Researchers

  • Demand the same rigour of communication aimed at the public and stakeholders as towards the scientific community
  • When communicating science, ensure that limitations and uncertainties are included as a routine part of science communication
  • Be aware that the concept of science is understood differently within and between science and society. Do not assume shared understandings when communicating

Actions for RPOs & Institutional Support officers

  • Include information about research ethics and integrity assessments in press releases as a consistent practice
  • Be transparent on cases where principles of good scientific practice are breached and take steps to communicate the steps taken to reinforce the integrity of science
  • Train researchers to include ethical and integrity considerations when communicating to the public both directly and indirectly

Actions for RFOs, National Policymakers, and the European Commission

  • Produce and maintain codes of conduct for science communication to ensure that these follow best practices and align with societal and scientific needs
  • Prioritize understanding of not only the results but also the methods and nature of science in science education and science communication efforts

9. Adapt to Changing Communication Landscapes

Actions for RPOs & Institutional Support officers

  • As the communication landscape changes, ensure that training adapts and that the resources available for researchers are fit for purpose
  • Commit to being present across platforms, providing access to research where public debate takes place
  • Ensure support and protection from abuse for those researchers and mediators who represent science in new communication formats
  • Provide institutional support for involving all different types of science communicators, professional media specialists, and researchers

Actions for Mediators and Researchers

  • Ensure that emerging forms of science communication and communicators are involved in the debate on science communication
  • Include public perspectives in communicating science, broadening ownership over scientific knowledge and the public debate and interactions about science
  • Harness new communication channels to improve and diversify public outreach when possible and meaningful

Actions for National and European Policymakers

  • Be proactive in steering adaptation to changing communication landscapes, through guidelines providing support for developing science communication practices
  • Ensure that legislation is regularly updated to protect researchers from harassment in online and other less regulated science communication environments
  • As modes of communication evolve, maintain and adapt codes of conduct for science communication that support not only established institutional actors but also emerging science communication practitioners

archive.php