🇫🇷Macron's 'Choose Europe for Science' speech [Translation]
At the Sorbonne, Macron called on global scientists to join Europe in defending free, open science and democracy against rising threats.
👋Hey guys, Julien here. The French Dispatch is a reader-supported publication, and both our coverage of current affairs as well as our ability to bring you more news and information on the world around us is entirely funded by paid subscriptions and donations.
If you enjoy reading articles written by high-level experts, then make sure to support the publication by liking, subscribing, and sharing it with your friends and colleagues, and consider taking a paid subscription.
Editors note: the original speech can be found here in French
Ladies and gentlemen,
Executive Vice-Presidents of the European Commission,
Madam European Commissioner,
Members of the French and European Parliaments,
Madam Rector,
Ladies and gentlemen, in your ranks and titles,
Ladies and gentlemen, researchers and scientists,
Thank you very much for your speech, your commitment, and your announcement, Madam President. It is extremely important today.
And I also want to thank our panellists for agreeing to speak today and for defending a cause that is theirs, and ours. I will speak in French. I am very pleased, if I may say so, to return to the Sorbonne. Several times here, we have spoken together about Europe, and about this Europe of freedom, prosperity, humanism, and knowledge. And, fundamentally, I would like to begin with that.
That is truly what is at stake today. You summed up this morning's discussions just now, Madam President, and you all support this, but I believe we must not minimise what is happening today. No one could have imagined a few years ago that one of the world’s largest democracies would cancel research programmes simply because the word “diversity” appeared in them.
No one would have thought that one of the world’s leading democracies would suddenly remove the ability for certain researchers to obtain visas, sometimes those who contributed to that nation’s own digital security. No one would have imagined that this great democracy, whose economic model is so firmly rooted in free science, in innovation, and in its ability over the past three decades to out-innovate and out-disseminate Europe, would make such a mistake. But here we are.
And when we begin by looking at the stakes, we must realise we are at a profound turning point, where the unthinkable has become the centre of our current reality. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, it feels as though we have been living constantly through times where the unthinkable continues to unfold, geopolitical rupture, economic upheaval, political disorientation.
This is the world we now inhabit. So, when I said that what is at stake is fundamentally who we are, I mean it sincerely in this setting, and I had the chance to say this a few weeks ago at Cairo University, it is even more true for Europe.
Across Europe, and you mentioned Bologna, one of the oldest sites, our most ancient institutions are our universities. Renaissance Europe, and then the Enlightenment, was built upon a desire to understand the world, to pursue free science, to educate the finest minds, and to comprehend the world in a way that honours human dignity, in the most universal sense.
Everything that binds us rests on this capacity to educate free, rational individuals, free because they are rational, because they have access to this open, free science, one that allows for debate, built upon facts and truths that are, at a moment in time, scientifically established, though later possibly refuted by other researchers, always judged by their peers. That is what connects and sustains us. It is what shaped our models and forms the foundation of our relationship to knowledge, to democracy, to economic effectiveness, and competitiveness.
Without free science, we lose these three pillars of our societies, the very heart of liberal Western democracies. And first of all, our relationship to truth. If we accept that truth is “revealed,” if we accept that certain types of research are forbidden, if we decide what is “good” and “evil” research and allocate or withhold funding accordingly, then we lose the ability to “disagree together,” as Voltaire once said.
That is, we lose the very possibility of knowledge, and the foundation of freedom of opinion. Nothing less than that. So yes, let us cherish this open, free science at the core of our societies and reject any diktat that suggests a government, any government, can declare certain research off limits, research into women's health, into cyclones, into climate change, because every time, these are lives on the line, and every time, it is humanity’s progress that is being challenged.
It is a moral and human imperative. But it is also the very foundation of our Europe, of our societies. And as you said just now, Madam President, the “Stand Up for Science” movement, driven by many researchers, whom I thank, and now echoed in this “Choose Europe for Science” initiative, aims to support researchers around the world who believe in free, open science, for all, and by all, to come to Europe, to work here, research here, teach here, with their families, in total freedom.
The second point is that no democracy can endure without free and open science. How can our societies debate if the relationship to fact and truth is undermined, either by absolute relativism or complete scepticism, or, again, if truth is treated as revelation, determined by political power at any given time as true or false?
The very possibility of democracy lies in the ability to debate, but to debate facts that are, at a given moment, solidly established and endorsed by a scientific authority. Many here are more eminent than I am to speak on this, but authority in this context means legitimacy, legitimacy recognised by one’s peers, earned by having studied more, read more books, gained recognition, climbed the ranks of a major research institution or university, gained accreditation to lead the work of others, and to teach.
Alongside academic freedom, there is indeed an authority of knowledge. But this is essential for our democracies because it distinguishes true from false; it allows us to define what a fact is and what it is not. Otherwise, we risk living, or perhaps we already are, in liquid democracies where separating truth from falsehood becomes impossible, laying fertile ground for conspiracy theories. In such a world, emotion prevails, as there is no longer any real relationship to reality or to facts. And thus, we endanger the very heart of our democracies, their roots: the possibility of public debate and an informed public opinion.
Lastly, this free science is the condition of our competitiveness. You mentioned this in your speech, and I know you defended it this morning. Ultimately, the best example is the American model, so deeply rooted in free science. It has developed one of the most effective systems in the world for transferring fundamental research to applied research.
Thanks to its sectoral specialisations and funding capabilities, the United States has, over the past thirty years, massively disseminated science and research through its economic model. This is also why their model has outperformed the European one over the past three decades, generating twice as much research per capita.
That is what we Europeans want to catch up with. It’s what we believe in. But as you can see, strategic autonomy, the very goal we pursue, is impossible without free, open science, and without massive and sustained investment in fundamental and applied research, and in the capacity to transfer research from the public to the private sector.
And that’s why it is so important, in our societies and our democracies, to maintain this free and open science in our universities, in our research institutions, to offer a new safe harbour to those who are under threat. The example of Marie Curie is admirable in this respect. But I hope many more Marie Curies are here today in this lecture hall, certainly in our laboratories, and in labs across the world.
I want to express my gratitude to all those who, in recent years, have tirelessly worked to improve our understanding of the deep oceans, of climate change, of coming cyclones; who have tirelessly pursued an open, free, independent understanding of algorithms, and of the independence of our societies from privatised models. In doing so, they reaffirm that yes, we need free, open science, because it is a treasure of humanity. It enables a world order that is not owned by a few, but offered to all, for the freedom of each and every person.
That is what we defend. That is what we believe in. It’s what our founding fathers, and mothers, though there are still too few around this amphitheatre, stood for. I hope tomorrow we will celebrate many more great women of European science and thought. But it is their fight, and it is ours to continue. In this context, we have done a great deal together over recent years.
As early as 2017, if I may remind you, in the face of climate scepticism, we launched the “Make Our Planet Great Again” programme. I know some of you mentioned it this morning. It allowed us to welcome leading researchers under conditions I wish to commend our universities and research institutions for providing. It enabled the continuation of programmes that had come under threat.
In the name of scientific universalism, the twin of European universalism, we also launched the PAUSE programme in 2017, initiated by the Collège de France. We have already committed €33 million to welcome nearly 600 scientists. The State will continue to support this ambition. Through this programme and others, including legislative proposals, we aim to better protect refugee scientists and, with them, academic freedom.
Being a refuge also means being attractive and competitive. Much has been done. I think of junior professorships, which allowed us to recruit, among 600 laureates, 60% foreign researchers or those working abroad. That’s six times more than usual in our recruitment processes.
So, contrary to the concerns of pessimists and Malthusians, there is no displacement effect, but rather emulation and complementarity. And all the researchers here today know this. Science thrives on emulation, on confrontation, on the ability to attract the best talents, who will in turn train our best talents, and bring in more of them.
The State is announcing additional funding. And I want to clarify many points I’ve heard debated: between 2020 and 2025, thanks to the Research Programming Law, the first of its kind in our nation’s history, we have increased budgets by more than €6 billion in total. By 2030, €25 billion will have been added to the research budget. Regarding remuneration, since 2020, bonuses for teacher-researchers and researchers have more than doubled.
By 2027, they will see an average increase of €6,000 to €8,000 per year compared to 2020. The National Research Agency is better supporting projects. In addition to ministerial budgets, France 2030 is investing more than €8 billion in education and research, including €4 billion in a wide range of research programmes across all sectors: quantum, hydrogen, batteries, artificial intelligence, infectious diseases, digital health, all of which continue to see reinvestment.
These multi-year investments, combining pay increases, bottom-up support, and thematic programmes based on our priorities, form the basis of our strategy. Is this enough? No. And I strongly support the government and ministers who aim to consolidate this trajectory, to ensure that next year and the year after, we continue advancing as planned.
The government will soon make proposals in this direction. They are essential, because thanks to these efforts and this funding, our institutions and universities can reinforce their national strategies. These efforts are also accompanied by a deep transformation of our research organisation, just as necessary.
We are transforming our institutions into programme agencies, consolidating the 29 university hubs, and finally unifying sites that had long been divided. Saclay is a perfect example of this. We’re also moving forward with performance-based contracts for our universities, until recently just a small portion of their budgets, but from next year, they will cover 100% of their funding capacity.
We indeed need deep reform in the organisation of our research and higher education system, reform we must embrace while continuing to invest and attract the best talent. It's a coherent whole, and we must defend it as such. So, beyond these efforts and building on what you just announced, Madam President, and what we wish to do nationally, we will continue to move forward, build our future, and invest in excellence.
First, for researchers and teacher-researchers: in the face of the threats I’ve described, and this international climate of apprehension, Europe must become a refuge. The €500 million programme you have just announced, the simplifications, the additional chairs, and the new support mechanisms are all vital elements in making Europe more attractive. In today’s international context, many French institutions, and I thank them for it, such as Aix-Marseille University, the CNRS, Centrale Supélec, PSL, and many others, have launched programmes to welcome researchers without waiting.
Our Europe must do more. That is the purpose of the programme you just announced, Choose Europe for Science, with concrete actions, funding, and principles. The message is simple: if you love freedom, come help us remain free, come search here, help us become better, and invest in our future. This is also the idea behind “Choose France for Science”, which we launched a few weeks ago. It generated over 30,000 visits, one-third from the United States, with several hundred application files opened. The goal is to welcome talent at every level, from PhD students to Nobel laureates, including post-docs and junior professors, based solely on the quality of their work.
Additional funding will be allocated, €100 million from the State through France 2030. And I thank the teams and the secretary general present here. I say this firmly: a foreign researcher does not replace a French or European one. The very spirit of science is built on cooperation, emulation, and conversation. That is why this will be a dedicated funding programme, announced today. And that’s also why we call on businesses, foundations, and everyone committed to our independence and freedom to co-finance these local initiatives to attract researchers and teacher-researchers.
Next, we must not overlook the importance of collaboration platforms and data. Welcoming researchers seeking freedom is one thing, but we also need the environment, the partnerships, and the availability of essential data. Beyond individual paths, what is most under threat today, due to the United States’ pivotal role in global science, are the major structural research platforms at the planetary scale: vital databases in epidemiology and climatology that risk being shut down, made inaccessible, or in some cases, permanently lost to science. This is no minor matter.
A world without IPCC reports to tell the truth about climate change would not be the same. The IPCC, IPBES, these are under threat. I am not even speaking about NOAA or the NIH, or the databases managed by several other major institutions.
France and Europe cannot let this happen. That’s why we urgently need to safeguard or recreate these databases to take over their stewardship. In the framework of the programmes we are building, and this is where we need all of you, we must establish funding and partnerships to recover and protect these research databases and collaboration platforms. Our researchers and laboratories, who have often contributed data and research, need these platforms for future discoveries. I hope that in the coming months, we can finalise key initiatives to preserve these research assets and ensure their European funding.
We’ve already begun along this path, and it’s exactly the philosophy we’ve applied to artificial intelligence, dear Anne, with support from the European Commission, and with public-private funding to create digital commons in the field of AI. The “Current AI” foundation we’ve established has precisely this goal. It has begun securing datasets and cooperative platforms to ensure that in artificial intelligence, we are not dependent on a few private actors. We are creating mechanisms for cooperation, open research, and data security in service of the common good.
In the fields of climate, planetary knowledge, and life sciences, we must continue this work, consolidate platforms and advance further. Let us collectively reflect on the daunting task of archiving specific knowledge. I’m thinking, for example, of the work done by Software Heritage, which in France archives all software ever created worldwide, an effort that deserves to be developed into a broader European initiative. Beyond attracting researchers and teacher-researchers, we must also focus on preserving, consolidating, and attracting collaborative platforms and data, all in service of the common good.
This massive investment in research must also be designed with a European perspective, through our shared programmes. As I’ve said, and as was central to the Draghi Report that you commissioned, Madam President, there is no European independence or strategic autonomy without a strong and free European science.
To choose science is, in a way, or rather, very clearly, to reject vassalage. And I say this because I observe something recurring. We Europeans have always had this hesitation. Let’s look at recent years. Here in 2017, I advocated for a more sovereign Europe in the scientific domain. To be honest with you, I wasn’t always followed. We sometimes failed, because it was so comfortable to walk hand in hand with the Americans. Many Europeans were deeply convinced: we’ll never be abandoned, we’re practically the same. That is not true.
We tried with cloud infrastructure. France pushed strongly. But we made a very serious mistake in failing to build a truly European cloud. We must get back to work on this. We cannot depend on a few American companies to manage our data infrastructure, it’s a matter of European public interest. Every time we become dependent, we create vassalage.
We were right to preserve sovereign and open European access to space. But we were wrong to hand over part of our satellite coverage to private actors. We saw this again with the threats made in Ukraine just weeks ago. I will say it clearly here: there is no such thing as happy vassalage. There may be unconscious vassalage, for a moment. There may be comfort in avoiding the investments needed to regain independence. But in the end, we always pay the price.
The strategic awakening we are experiencing these past few months must not be seen as just another bad moment to endure. It is a true awakening. We must now rediscover, across all sectors of research and industry, the strategic autonomy that is indispensable.
And I want a Europe where the capacity to explore, to understand, to teach, to innovate, does not depend on China or the United States when it comes to the algorithms shaping our societies, to space access, to the understanding of our oceans, our climate, our semiconductors, and so on.
We have everything we need to achieve this. Sometimes, we simply need to get organised. Sometimes, we need to commit again to funding and to European competitiveness.
To that end, we must simplify. We’ve begun, but we must go much further. This is part of the essential reforms within the French landscape: simplify the management of laboratories, simplify partnerships between laboratories and the private sector. You are already pursuing this at the European level. Let’s move quickly and boldly.
Secondly, we must assign responsibility, so that each actor conducts an ambitious scientific policy within a unified strategic discussion involving all partners.
And thirdly, we must reinforce this ambition as Europeans.
What you recalled, Madam President, is essential. The Horizon Europe programme is a vital lever. The ERC Synergy grants are a treasure, and many people here today have benefited from these programmes that fund the best research projects. I believe we can go even further with several additional initiatives.
In France, we created a great success story about fifteen years ago: the LABEX initiative, which supports laboratories of excellence over multiple years. We want to extend this nationally. But several among you, and I thank you, have argued that we should elevate LABEX to the European level: not just funding projects, but funding teams, for several years, with European financing. This would offer more simplicity, more visibility, and rely on peer-reviewed evaluations. That’s how we will make our research more competitive.
We also need to better define our programmatic ambitions in critical fields. While continuing to fund bottom-up research, we must also, like we’ve done with the IPCEI projects, acknowledge that there are perhaps ten “projects of the century” that deserve massive investment, prioritisation, and synergy-building.
In the field of health, infectious diseases, vaccinology, zoonoses and transmission to humans; in space, including lunar access and observation missions; in quantum technology; in artificial intelligence; in circular economy, so crucial for European sovereignty, since we have neither fossil fuels nor the rare earths needed for ecological transition and must avoid new dependencies.
In ageing and regeneration, a tremendous challenge for our societies; in nuclear energy, in fusion, in climate science, whether through Earth system understanding or ocean research; in advanced electronics and microchips; and lastly, in critical thinking and the fight against disinformation, in all areas, from health, to climate, to science in general.
That’s ten “projects of the century.” Perhaps not exhaustive, but I believe these ten are fundamental. We Europeans must invest massively in them, launch ten major European programmes, and aim to build cooperation between countries.
We will begin doing this in a few days with our German partners, but we must also open this to all partners beyond the European Union, our British neighbours, who are eager to reconnect with us, as well as major countries like India. Let us engage more broadly, around Europe, in thinking through these grand themes.
Beyond these programmes, after researchers, platforms, and data, there is the matter of infrastructure and innovation. You mentioned this, Madam President. We are home to some of the most outstanding infrastructures in the world: CERN, the synchrotron, our accelerators, our experimental reactors, all of which have enabled magnificent industrial successes.
We must reinvest in them, and remember that these exceptional research instruments, cooperative and open, where the whole world gathers at the table, are treasures. We must also build the infrastructures of tomorrow, while continuing to reinvest in those of today.
Just a few weeks ago, at the AI Summit in Paris, you announced your intention to fund European supercomputers, open to public research. These are essential infrastructures.
We also need to develop storage infrastructures for Earth system sciences, for in-situ ocean observation, which we’ll revisit during UNOC, and in biomedicine, particularly in genomics. Whether it’s Earth, its oceans, or health and the genome, these are extremely costly infrastructures that we must finance and render sustainable and stable.
And finally, beyond infrastructure, there is the issue of the innovation system and its effectiveness. Ultimately, it rests on a few simple pillars: talent, capital, and the capacity to move fast. I believe you summed this up perfectly this morning, and the major business leaders and researchers here know it very well.
So let us continue to accelerate the development of the European Innovation Council that you launched, Madam President. Let us pursue programmes that are more independent, more risk-tolerant, to mobilise new methods.
Let’s simplify and accelerate the transfer between fundamental research, applied research, and industrial applications. Again, let’s simplify with standard contracts between industry and laboratories, because we know our procedures are too slow and still too inconsistent across Europe.
Let’s simplify and speed up all transfer procedures. We are still much too slow. I think, for example, of clinical trials. Just look at the difference: six months in the United States, but two to five years in Europe. That’s not about money, it’s about simplification and speed. The best teams will come if we offer such simplification and acceleration.
Then we must invest, and yes, that is about money, public and private funding, to also improve specific parts of applied research and their capacity to convert into innovation and speed up.
The Deep Tech plan under France 2030 has already led to the creation of over 1,500 Deep Tech startups in five years, doubling the annual creation rate, which will reach over 380 startups in 2024.
Here too, I think we must and can aim high at the European level, with Deep Tech funding plans and massive financing strategies for scale-ups.
Two years ago, we launched Scale-Up Europe, which aimed to Europeanise what had worked very well in France: our ability to attract much more private sector funding into innovation and startup creation, but also their growth. This is the revolution we need to win at the European level.
And for that, the foundation lies in mobilising our savings for more equity financing and risk capital. This is central to the urgent priorities of the coming months and to your agenda: securitisation, mobilisation of private funds, the Single European Capital Market, or Capital Market Union, in good French. On all these fronts, this is how Europe will innovate more and accelerate technology transfer.
Ladies and gentlemen, these are the key areas where I believe we must and will commit, alongside the President of the European Commission, Vice-Presidents and Commissioners, and all our colleagues in Europe. Because this is a European endeavour that involves us all.
Today, ultimately, what we want to launch from the Sorbonne is a call to action. Beyond the funding, the announcements, the priorities, a call from the Sorbonne, addressed to all free spirits who want to serve science and defend our model. To those who want to choose one model of society over another. To those who believe in a particular vision of freedom. A model built on equality between women and men, a model built on the role of science, and on fraternity between peoples, to find answers to the great challenges of our century.
We deeply believe that Europe, from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment, was built on our ability to free ourselves from all dogmas, and to forge the only true freedom: the one that begins where ignorance ends, to paraphrase Victor Hugo.
I call on all researchers around the world to join this great European project, to unite for and with Europe. Because we believe deeply that our democracies are stronger, that they were the ones that best fought Covid a few years ago, through controversies and open debates, but also through science that advanced in the open air, by seeking, stumbling, innovating, creating, contradicting, and being contradicted.
We do not believe in a decision-making model based on the diktat of a few, nor in science as dogma, nor in one ideology over another. Join this Europe that believes that democracies will be stronger tomorrow, stronger in defeating cancer, in leading climate transitions, in understanding space and the deep ocean, and ultimately, in building knowledge in service of human progress.
Unite for this model of freedom, knowledge, and understanding, this European hope. This is the model we believe in. And this call is not only for researchers around the world, but also a call to the youth.
Yes, I call on all young people to join and commit themselves to science. And especially, a call to young girls. Our nation needs to attract all talents to science, and in particular, to bring more young girls and young women into scientific and technical fields.
This is a call for the free, independent science we believe in, for clarity, for reason, for this continent that has produced more than 500 Nobel Prizes, and that will produce even more. Europe will continue to build its independence, strength, and resilience through knowledge, open and free research, and through the youth of today and tomorrow who will join it.
This Sorbonne Call that we launch today, together with the President of the Commission and with all of you, is, in the end, the profound affirmation that we believe in what has shaped us: knowledge, freedom, the ability for the youngest in our nations to challenge the dogmas we believe in, to be guided always by doubt, to constantly question the foundations we inherited, but to do so freely, in a permanent dialogue with their peers around the world, and always in the service of this universalist vision, and nothing else.
Long live research, long live free and open science, long live Europe, long live the Republic, and long live France.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for reading the French Dispatch! If you liked what you read, you should like this post and subscribe to the newsletter by clicking/tapping the button below:
And if you’d like to contribute a coffee or two to help fuel my coverage of the wild world of politics, feel free to click on the picture below:
Is there any polarised debate in France abour gender studies?