In the last edition of 2019, Chemistry in Europe this time round includes an Editorial by David Cole-Hamilton who reflects on his experience with EuChemS, a look into the recent EFSA Stakeholder Forum, input from our Professional Networks, the European Young Chemists’ Network, as well as our Member Societies. The newsletter moreover includes news on the EuChemS Historical Landmarks Award, and an interview with Iwona Maciejowska, Past-Chair of the EuChemS Division of Chemical Education. You can read the newsletter here.

In a recently published report on ‘Paving the way for a circular economy: insights on status and potentials’, the European Environment Agency (EEA) – the EU’s agency tasked with providing sound and independent information on the environment – refers to the EuChemS Periodic Table highlighting element scarcity, illustrating the impact that Chemistry has on overarching policy issues both in Europe and worldwide. It is moreover testament of the far-reaching impact of the EuChemS Periodic Table and its relevance in science-policy interactions.

The report looks at some of the challenges facing the implementation of a sustainable circular economy. In a departure from previous reports, it goes beyond a focus on overarching concepts of what circularity entails and specific aspects that define it. Rather, the report aims to analyse the ways forward and to provide insights into the current situation and areas of potential. It recognises that fostering circular material use requires a broad system perspective and extensive stakeholder involvement. The entire product lifecycle — including the design, production, consumption and waste phases — needs to be addressed in a coherent way. The enablers of and barriers to circular business models need to be well understood and addressed before innovation and competitiveness can be enhanced”. The EEA’s report moreover looks at the status of individual materials and the need to assess the real availability of a material by combining information on the supply risk and recycling input rates.

You can access and read the full report here.

A special panel of advisors, the EU’s Group of Chief Scientific Advisors, has published a new report with recommendations for further improving the way the EU institutions in Brussels gather and use scientific advice. The report calls for strengthening the use of scientific advice in policymaking, making decisions more transparent and on setting up guidelines and a set of best practices in the use of scientific advice. The latter aims to address the issue of a fragmented landscape from which scientific knowledge is gathered. At the moment, the European Commission receives input from the Joint Research Centre (JRC), EU agencies such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), but also its Directorate-Generals, and the Scientific Advice Mechanism. Further scientific advice is also collected via open consultations and calls for feedback – all of which employ various methodologies. The report also looks at the need for the Commission to carefully deal with conflicts of interest, especially in the use of panels which usually include representatives from industry, academia or NGOs, each of whom may have specific agendas.

Some of the proposed recommendations include engaging early and regularly with stakeholders; clarifying the boundaries between science, scientific advice and politics; defining with stakeholders the questions to be addressed; refining approaches to conflicts of interest; using the most suitable uncertainty analysis approaches; better communicating uncertainties and diverging scientific views, amongst a plethora of other proposals.

You can read the report here.