Is Europe ready to overcome its own limitations?

This article was exclusively written for The European Sting by one of our passionate readers, Mr. Antonio Cristóbal Luque Ambrosiani. The opinions expressed within reflect only the writer’s views and not necessarily The European Sting’s position on the issue.

We might just need a researcher mindset to thrive in this increasingly competitive world

Although it is difficult to ascertain that there is an absolute truth, we do know that there are different ways of approaching knowledge, whatever the field. In the academic world, it is assumed that the scientific method should guide the study of any subject. However, when it comes to politics we see that this is not always the case.

In politics, numerous influences converge, from social trends, religion, economic models, future perspectives, fears, egos to scientific knowledge. This is expected coming from a system made and run by humans, and it is foolish to think that the guide to deciding which reforms will be approved will be solely and exclusively the scientific method, even this would be inappropriate because it would leave behind the perspective of the people on whom the laws will influence. However, I do believe that there is something that could greatly benefit politics, beyond the participation of scientists in it, which can also contribute enormously to is proper working.

Bringing the working method of a researcher into the political arena would entail numerous advantages. Firstly, it would force politicians to collect good quality data before taking such measures. By doing this, they would avoid taking measures based on fear or suspicion towards someone or something, but rather considering different points of view, being able to take a broader look on an issue. Next, once the information has been gathered, a methodology would be devised to test the hypothesis, in this case the law or reform that is to be approved, being able to model the possible impact of the measures and use different schemes that can anticipate the course of action that is derived. Finally, it could be used to propose future measures by repeating the same cycle of action, always through the lenses of trial and error, ideally first modelling so harms derived from real-world trailing can be avoided, or at least, reduced to the bare minimum.

The main disadvantage is that to be able to do this it would have to mandatory to surround politicians with people who are experts in the fields being studied, which would range from university professors to employees in that sector, since each one of them would provide a different vision, instead of people who are “trusted”, who follow a more nepotistic criterion than anything else. It also creates another problem which is the fact that doing things this way requires more time particularly at the beginning, until the learning curve of applying this method is completed.

Does it then pay off to do things as proposed? Personally, I think it does. One of the main changes would be to know the sources of information that politicians use to make decisions. Let’s see an example of this. If a politician asks several communities if it is necessary to increase a local tax in a city to put elevators in blocks that do not have them and it happens that in these communities the apartments are two stories and the average age of the inhabitants is 20 years old, do you think that will be an adequate source to make the best decision possible? Most likely not, because it will ignore the opinion of those communities where there are elderly people who do need such help, especially those who lack the resources to finance it for themselves.

The other fundamental advantage would be to know the conflicts of interest. If each reform were presented as an article sent to a scientific journal, every citizen and also every politician from the opposition could know what influences there are on the person who is making the proposal. No one is immune to external influences, not even in science, but it would make us freer to have this information, so we are able to make our own decisions better by knowing this reality.

Perhaps, if we apply a more scientific mind to our policies, we will avoid the slow agony of Europe warned by Mario Draghi in his study on the competitiveness of Europe, being an example, in my personal view, of the successful application of what is set out in this opinion article.

References:

1. Martin J. Let science be a springboard for politics. Nature. 2017 Jun 27;546(7660):577. https://doi.org/10.1038/546577a
2. EU competitiveness: Looking ahead. [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; 2024 [cited 2024 Sep 17]. Available from: https://commission.europa.eu/about-european-commission_en