Time to reform European science funding.

L aments about a " brain drain " of Europe's young scientists to the USA abounded at the recent Federation of European Neuroscience Societies (FENS) Forum 2004 in Lisbon. By some reports, a third or more of the young scientists who pursue postdoc-toral training in the United States remain in North America, where they find it relatively easy to secure jobs and funding in a scientific market spanning five time zones. In contrast, most European scientists can compete for funding only in their own country, where the available pots may be small. But there is no compelling reason that neuroscience in Europe should remain bound by national borders. Vigorous suprana-tional European funding for basic science could go a long way toward making careers in Europe more attractive to emigrant postdocs. Part of the problem is mediocre overall funding. Start-up packages for new neuroscience faculty members at US research universities average $400,000 or more, but packages in Europe range from nonex-istent to low. A German Junior Professor may receive €60,000 ($73,200). French funding agencies have recently begun awarding start-up funds of €60,000–140,000 to select young investigators. However, these are highly competitive: in 2003 one of these programs funded only 87 of 1221 applicants. Not enough, says Franck Polleux, a developmental neuroscientist who after postdoctoral training in the US returned to France to start his own laboratory in an INSERM unit in Lyon, only to quit two years later for an assistant professorship at the University of North Carolina. Certainly more money is always welcome, but another part of the problem is how available research funds are administered. The European Union provides some funds for neuroscience, through its Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) and individual fellowships. Pierre Magistretti of the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, and recent president of FENS, estimates that the EU contributes less than 10% of neu-roscience funding in Europe. Funding basic research is not a priority; the official goal of FP6 is to " strengthen the scientific and technological bases of industry and encourage its international competitiveness. " Thus FP6 focuses on applied science, and its procedures are more common to industrial development than basic research. The European Commission issues calls for applications on clearly circum-scribed projects deemed to be in the best interest of European society. The projects are defined in an extensive process of consultation, involving national program committees and scientific advisory boards. The Third Call, issued this …