Il Sole 24 Ore, March 6, 2008

Honorable President of the Republic,

We are writing to you because of the interest you have shown in the crucial role played by scientific research in our country and in the urgent need to change the procedures to allocate funding.

At this particular moment, the political forces that are announcing their candidature to lead the country are presenting their electoral programmes in which research, however, is not included. Once again we run the risk of concentrating on immediate and short term issues instead of focusing on strategic development perspectives of which research is an indispensable instrument. We are appealing to you in order to engage the political forces, starting from now, in developing the necessary instruments to re-launch science in Italy and to implement these measures once the new Government is formed.

Frequently, the insufficiency of funds is the argument used to justify the lack of improvement of science in Italy. However, the purpose of this appeal is not to increase funding but rather to change the modality in which it is distributed. In Italy, only a marginal quota of funding for scientific research in general and for research in the Life Sciences and Biomedicine in particular, is allocated through the peer-review process, i.e. through an independent and regulated evaluation of scientific merit by anonymous and competent third parties.

In the public sector, this challenges the interests of the public administration as it introduces non-scientific factors into the decision, such as ideological prejudices, personal pressures, affiliation and conflicts of interest. It also challenges the quality of science, which is nourished by intellectual, prejudice-free competition, as well as the contribution of science to the solution of problems of social interest, that is only possible through a transparent and competitive evaluation system.

In Italy, current funding procedures allow direct, uncontrolled negotiation between the public administration and researchers, group of researchers or scientific institutions. These procedures are against the principles and ideas (?) that inspire and regulate funding in countries where the promotion of science is considered to be of public interest and where science attains the highest levels of quality.

It is imperative that mechanisms of evaluation that ensure the success of science, and therefore the best use of public money, are made into Government laws and regulations, common to every kind of funding regardless of the public administration sector managing it and of the branch of the scientific community under peer-review. If science is the common heritage of a country, the rules for its management cannot be left undefined, politically debatable or subject to redefinition in the academic environment.

It is imperative that a Government law is passed at once so that no public funding for scientific research is granted without a formal and regulated peer-review process. Moreover, in order to facilitate the definition and implementation of regulations, a single funding agency must be established as soon as possible, composed of experts from the national and international scientific community, and intended to organise and standardise the process of evaluation and selection of scientific proposals for all the national and regional bodies that administer funding for research in the Life Sciences and Biomedicine.

How research is financed plays a fundamental role in the quality of science, more than the amount of resources assigned to it. The quality of science as well as a correct administration are basic aims of a civil community and of the Government, therefore this issue must be urgently included in current political priorities. The Italian scientific community preserves a precious heritage of national and international experience, which is an essential guarantee of efficiency and correctness. The scientific community's intellectual and civil contribution to the regulation of science management is therefore essential.

Paolo Bianco, University of Rome La Sapienza
Ranieri Cancedda, Institute for Cancer Research, University of Genoa
Elena Cattaneo, University of Milan
Stefano Di Donato, Besta Neurologic Institute, Milan
Pier Mannuccio Mannucci, University of Milan, Presidente del Gruppo 2003
Jacopo Meldolesi, University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan
Giovanni Romeo, Progen Consortium and University of Bologna