Science as a global public good? From the right to participate in science to science governance

16 - 17 March 2026 09:00 - 17:00 The Royal Society Free Watch online
Register for tickets
Science as a global public good - Lead image

Science+ meeting organised by Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS and Professor Michela Massimi.
With support from UNESCO.

The role of science for democratic societies has never been more important. Treating science as a global public good, amid rampant privatisation of scientific research, is a powerful structuring concept for science policy, and it offers a possible lens for interpreting the human right to participate in science. The purpose of the meeting is to explore the theoretical and practical consequences of this move for science governance and scientific research.

Programme

The programme, including speaker biographies and abstracts, is available below but please note the programme may be subject to change.

Attending this event

This event is intended for researchers in the relevant fields.

  • Free to attend
  • Both virtual and in-person attendance is available. Advance registration is essential
  • To attend virtually, please register and you will be sent a streaming link close to the meeting date
  • Lunch is available on both days of the meeting for an optional £25 per day. There are plenty of places to eat nearby if you would prefer to purchase food offsite. Participants are welcome to bring their own lunch to the meeting

Enquiries: Scientific Programmes team.

Organisers

  • Geoffrey Boulton

    Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

    Geoffrey Boulton OBE FRSE MAE FRS is Regius Professor of Geology Emeritus at Edinburgh University, distinguished for his research in glaciology. He has been a member of the UK Prime Minister’s Council for Science and Technology, chaired the Royal Society’s Science Policy Centre and several of its science reports, including Science as an Open Enterprise. He has been President of the Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA) and is a member of the Governing Board of the International Science Council for which he authored its position paper on Science as a Global Public Good.

  • Professor Michela Massimi

    Professor Michela Massimi

    Michela Massimi is Professor of Philosophy of Science at the University of Edinburgh. She is Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Royal Astronomical Society, the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, and elected member of the Academia Europaea. Professor Massimi has written extensively on a variety of philosophical topics surrounding scientific practice, from pluralism in science to local knowledge and the right to participate in science. In 2017 she received the Royal Society Wilkins-Bernal-Medawar Medal for her interdisciplinary work in philosophy of science. Her 2022 monograph Perspectival Realism (OUP) won the Lakatos Award in 2023. She has served as President of the US-based Philosophy of Science Association (2023-24) and previously as Vice President of the European Philosophy of Science Association (2015-19). For more details please see: https://www.michelamassimi.com.

Schedule

Chair

Uta Frith

Professor Uta Frith DBE FRS

UCL University College London, UK

Chris Frith

Professor Chris Frith

University College London, UK

09:15-09:30 Welcome by the Royal Society and organising committee
Professor Michela Massimi

Professor Michela Massimi

University of Edinburgh, UK

09:30-10:00 Making science a public good

Well-informed citizens are essential to democracy, and a “scientific temper”, a willingness to change previous conclusions in the face of new evidence, is crucial in making sense of and navigating the increasingly complex world we live in. Such a “temper” invigorates society’s ability to make informed judgements in complex settings. Treating science as a public good, free at the point of use, is a policy option that could contribute to this objective and a means of realising the human right to science. This has, however, become more problematic in the last two decades. Algorithms used by social media platforms have discouraged restraint and created self-insulating bubbles of certainty that undermine societal dialogue. Increasingly illiberal governments have fostered “alternative facts” and “viewpoint diversity”. The landscape of communication has been crumbling before our eyes, crippling the very institutions that have provided the frame for social solidarity in modern democracies. Where might countervailing action come from? Is the science community able to change? Could the universities lead in a new era of science that is open to society?

Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

Edinburgh University

10:00-10:30 The relationship between the freedom and safety of scientific researchers, public trust in science, and an inclusive science-policy interface

The rights to participate in scientific progress and to enjoy the benefits of scientific knowledge are crucial to science as a public good. Scientific freedom is an inherent and inalienable component of these rights and it is fundamental to good science. By reference to practical work being done at UNESCO, we demonstrate the indivisible relationship between the freedom and safety of scientific researchers, public trust in science, and an effective and inclusive science policy interface. We do so through the interaction of UNESCO’s Recommendations on Science and Scientific Researchers (2017) and Open Science (2021) and CESCR’s General Comment No. 25. Specifically, we survey three major UNESCO projects and apply them to the practical implementation of the right to science: its Call to Action on the Freedom and Safety of Scientists, particularly as a means to secure intellectual autonomy; reporting by States in respect of the right science in the UDHR through the UPR process and on the implementation of the RSSR; and an Assessment Tool currently being developed to monitor implementation of the RSSR’s norms and standards by UNESCO Member States.

Dr Konstantinos Tararas

Dr Konstantinos Tararas

UNESCO, France

Dr Andrew Mazibrada

Dr Andrew Mazibrada

UNESCO, UK

10:30-11:00 Coffee break
11:00-11:30 A human rights approach to science: recalibrating the priorities

In their piece based on the 2023 report of the Special Rapporteur in the field of Cultural rights, Xanthaki and Bidault argue that the right to science is essential in current discussions about the main challenges that society faces, not least the use of technology, climate change and the allocation and use of resources. Yet, this right as recognised in article 15 ICESCR is hugely underused by international organisations and states alike. The article discusses the meaning of science as infused by the principles of diversity and decolonisation of science. It then zooms into reflecting on the recognition of the right to ‘everyone’ and discusses how this can be realised. A decolonised right to science where everyone participates in defining and implementing it entails reset priorities and foci that the piece advocates for.

Professor Alexandra Xanthaki

Professor Alexandra Xanthaki

UN Special Rapporteur Cultural Rights

Dr Mylène Bidault

Dr Mylène Bidault

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

11:30-12:00 ‘As open as possible’: The right to science to the rescue?

Both the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) from 1966 offer a broad and rights-based approach to the topic of science as a global public good. One relevant and important part of the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications (or just the right to science), outlined in Article 15 of the ICESCR, is the obligation it places on member states to “recognize the benefits to be derived from the encouragement and development of international contacts and co-operation in the scientific and cultural fields” (Article 15,4). International scientific cooperation and the free flow of people and ideas are necessary for scientists to enjoy their scientific freedom, which is respected in Article 15,3 ICESCR. And without scientific freedom no groundbreaking research will be generated that can be shared for the benefit of all. This essay will discuss two current developments that act as unfortunate obstacles to the enjoyment of science as a global public good: the securitization of research and intellectual property. The argument is that the right to science may help us fight against the worst excesses of both.

Professor Helle Porsdam

Professor Helle Porsdam

UNESCO Chair on the right to science, Denmark

Chair

 Professor Jim Al-Khalili

Professor Jim Al-Khalili CBE FRS

University of Surrey, UK

13:00-13:30 What exactly is "The human right to science"?

This essay will explore what people might be asking for when they insist on “the human right to science”. Typically, rights are connected with actions or with protections against the actions of others. In the case of science, there might be a right to participate in scientific investigation, or a right to have access to the studies of the scientific community, or a right not to have a local culture displaced by practices generated from some field of science. And, beyond these three possibilities, there are other alternatives. I shall canvass what I take to be the principal candidates, and try to evaluate their status as pan-human rights.

Professor Philip Kitcher

Professor Philip Kitcher

Columbia University, US

13:30-14:00 When is science a global public good? A human-rights approach to transnational science governance

In this talk I will be exploring the broad contours of a new social contract for science, with a focus on public participation in science. I start with the debate on disinformation and misinformation and I present a problem that arises when the best available scientific evidence is used and communicated to the public in a deceptive way. Using as a test case the problem of global plastic waste, I argue for the need of a human-rights approach to science. I leverage the human right to participate in science and the right to a clean environment to argue that public participation in science is pivotal to a new transparent and participative social contract for science and to the delivery of transnational public goods such as environmental protection.

Professor Michela Massimi

Professor Michela Massimi

University of Edinburgh, UK

14:00-14:30 What could a human right to participate in science be?

At first sight, the idea of a human right to participate in science may seem absurd. Many assume science must be the preserve of those with the training and aptitude. However, feminist studies of science teaches that science is a social practice, with norms of inclusion and exclusion. Political philosophers have also introduced the notion of ‘contributive justice’: that it is an injustice if some cannot contribute to the well-being of others. Combining these insights with that of science as a global public good, I explore the possibilities of a human right to participate in science.

Professor Jonathan Wolff

Professor Jonathan Wolff

University of Oxford, UK

14:30-14:50 Coffee break
14:50-15:20 Can science diplomacy help safeguard science as a global public good? Some reflections

In a world where scientific data - and data generally - have significant commercial value, and where geopolitical tensions strongly impinge on international scientific collaboration, the notion and practice of science as global public good is under pressure and so are the ways to pursue it.

Science diplomacy acknowledges that science impacts diplomacy and diplomacy impacts science, and that both cooperation and competition shape the diverse practices of science diplomacy -from science fostering international relations and serving global public goods, to foreign and security policy interests being in conflict with the notion of science as an open, collaborative enterprise.

Three challenges and opportunities for safeguarding science as a global public good through science diplomacy looks especially worth considering: they relate to strategy, data, people.

Strategy: the notion of “technological sovereignty” emerged recently: is such notion, and its practices, compatible with or a threat to the notion of science -closely interlinked with technology- as global public good?

Data: scientists have been developing and relying on large datasets to address the causes and impacts of climate change, pandemics and more; these are at risk due to both deletion policies by governments and by appropriation processes by companies. How can science as global public good ‘survive’ such challenge?

People: science is made by people (also in an increasingly “AI world”). Academics, scientists, teachers have been increasingly affected by or a direct target of violent conflicts. In addition, academic freedom is being restricted in many countries. What are the implications for science as global public good?

Dr Angela Liberatore

Dr Angela Liberatore

Science Diplomacy Fellow, European University Institute, Italy

15:20-15:50 Education, diversity and progress

Around the world, girls and women are much less likely to be able to access and complete a good education, yet investing in their education helps them develop skills for jobs - the surest way out of poverty. However, around the world expectations of what is ‘appropriate’ for girls to study and the imposition of gender stereotypes can limit the actual education and the aspirations of women. Even in countries such as the UK, stereotyping continues to deter girls from pursuing careers based around subjects like the physical sciences, engineering and computing, and timely careers advice is often lacking.

Access to a good science education matters, whether or not a girl is going to follow a professional career, for instance providing information about nutrition and healthcare that can be brought into the home environment. Indeed, in an increasingly technological world, many daily decisions require some understanding of basic science concepts. The potential absence of the voices of women mean many problems that affect them may get overlooked or remain unfunded. This is the case, for instance, for many diseases that affect only or predominantly women, such as endometriosis. What technologies get developed and who they benefit needs to be as focussed around women as men. The world economy is impacted by the loss of women’s voices and individuals may be hindered or even harmed.

Professor Dame Athene Donald DBE FRS

Professor Dame Athene Donald DBE FRS

University of Cambridge, UK

15:50-16:10 Coffee break
16:10-16:55 Roundtable: The conceptual framework

Discussion led by Chair, Professor Jim Al-Khalili

Professor Jim Al-Khalili CBE FRS

Professor Jim Al-Khalili CBE FRS

University of Surrey, UK

Dr Konstantinos Tararas

Dr Konstantinos Tararas

UNESCO, France

Professor Alexandra Xanthaki

Professor Alexandra Xanthaki

UN Special Rapporteur Cultural Rights

Professor Helle Porsdam

Professor Helle Porsdam

UNESCO Chair on the right to science, Denmark

Professor Michela Massimi

Professor Michela Massimi

University of Edinburgh, UK

Professor Philip Kitcher

Professor Philip Kitcher

Columbia University, US

Professor Jonathan Wolff

Professor Jonathan Wolff

University of Oxford, UK

16:55-17:00 Closing remarks
17:00-18:30 Drinks reception

Chair

Fiona Marshall

Dr Fiona Marshall FRS

Head of Neuroscience Discovery and Head of the Discovery Research Centre in London, UK

09:00-09:30 The technological and societal determinants of open science

The advance of science is dependent on the communication technologies available to it and is structured by intrinsic social conventions and norms as well as extrinsic commercial and political forces. The idea of knowledge as a public good was enabled by the printing press and reinforced by recognising priority in publication as the basis for academic status. Today digital technologies have again disrupted the communication of science; the use of traditional publication as the basis for research evaluation has developed multiple pathologies; commercial rent-seeking by enclosure of the intellectual commons is rampant; and we see a disturbing rise in nationalism and protectionism. How do we defend and promote science as a global public good in this fragmented world?

Professor Luke Drury

Professor Luke Drury

Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Ireland

09:30-10:00 Life science research: constants and variables in a changing world

Life science research has never been more dynamic, multidisciplinary and potentially productive. We have unprecedented tools to study living things at the molecular, cellular and organismal levels and more scientists worldwide than ever before to make use of them. Despite this, it often feels as though the enterprise is teetering on the edge of crisis. This is partly due to the uncertain world in within which research is now conducted. But it is also due to constraints on essential aspects of the scientific process itself – some old and some new. As a university-based academic with 50 years’ experience as a group leader, I will present reflections on the process and funding of research as well as its communication via the scientific literature. The persistence of scientific fashions, the bureaucratization of institutions and the importance of incremental discovery will be discussed.

Professor Sir Adrian Bird FRS

Professor Sir Adrian Bird FRS

University of Edinburgh, UK

10:00-10:30 Public science in the age of information, misinformation, accumulation, and instant communication

The history of humankind has been, in part, the history of information control. Guilds, secrets, legal control and royal edicts have all played their part. And yet information is now shared, duplicated, circulated and amalgamated at incredible speeds. Despite this, control of information is the reaper of unprecedented gains, manipulation of information is at an all-time high, and actual human-to-human communication is increasingly fraught. The cost of science is substantial, and the blurring of corporate science and public science is seductive in its financing, yet they are not the same. Science without significant marketing can get lost in the waves of a social media sea. So is Public Science now just the branding exercise and whitewashing by powerful organisations? Is economic benefit the determiner of the value of science? Indeed, has it always really been that way? The future depends increasingly on the Scientist. More and more we need the Scientist to side with the public. I will illustrate this talk from lessons from the recent history of Artificial Intelligence research, which has both pioneered Public Science, and caused the casualty of the loss of Public Science at the same time. Finally, I will call for a better Theory of the Value of Information, the vital theory of our age.

Professor Amos Storkey

Professor Amos Storkey

University of Edinburgh, UK

10:30-11:00 Coffee break
11:00-12:00 Roundtable: Perspectives from working scientists and institutions

Discussion led by Chair, Dr Fiona Marshall

Dr Fiona Marshall FRS

Dr Fiona Marshall FRS

Head of Neuroscience Discovery and Head of the Discovery Research Centre in London, UK

Sir Warren East FRS

Sir Warren East FRS

Former CEO Rolls Royce, UK

Professor Sir Nigel Thrift

Professor Sir Nigel Thrift

University of Bristol, UK

Dr Osarenkhoe Ogbeide

Dr Osarenkhoe Ogbeide

University of Cambridge, UK

Dr Zeynep Pamuk

Dr Zeynep Pamuk

Nuffield College, University of Oxford, UK

Professor Gabi Hegerl FRS

Professor Gabi Hegerl FRS

University of Edinburgh, UK

Dr Ed Pyzer-Knapp

Dr Ed Pyzer-Knapp

Xyme / UK Young Academy, UK

Dr Amy Vincent

Dr Amy Vincent

UK Young Academy, UK

Chair

Mark Walport

Sir Mark Walport FRCP FMedSci HonFRSE FRS

The Royal Society

13:00-13:30 Science as a public good

Science brings clear public benefits, such as economic growth, improved public services, and higher quality of life. There are deeper benefits too – it shows the benefits of evidence and reason. These are powerful arguments for public funding. However that brings with it new challenges. To what extent can governments as funders also shape the research agenda? In the UK that prompts a lively and continuing debate about how to interpret the Haldane principle that Government should not interfere in research funding decisions.

If Government is funding science (and even it is not) to what extent should the scientific endeavour be constrained by the values of its citizens? If such constraints are accepted it makes citizen engagement with science even more important. That brings uncomfortable questions. Is the public always going to benefit? Do the motives of scientists matter? Do the sources of funding matter? Can the integrity of research be trusted? What are the limits to the scientific enterprise and how should they be set? Science cannot enjoy the benefits of public support without also facing such difficult questions.

Professor Lord David Willetts FRS

Professor Lord David Willetts FRS

Resolution Foundation, UK

13:30-14:00 Global science in a fractured world

In an era of intensifying geopolitical competition and technology securitization, the principle of science as a global public good faces systematic erosion. Governments increasingly view international collaboration through a zero-sum lens, implementing restrictive security protocols and retreating from multilateral frameworks precisely when global challenges demand coordinated scientific response. This widening gap between global threats and fragmented science raises urgent governance questions. Drawing on historical and contemporary models, I examine how researchers in the "second ring" of geopolitics can build open scientific frameworks. I argue that defending the elements of global collaboration – academic freedom, transparency, mobility, and inclusive participation – is not an ideological commitment but an operational necessity for science to deliver on its promises.

Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf FRS

Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf FRS

University of Amsterdam, Netherlands

14:00-14:30 The scientific advice mechanism: a perspective

The Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM) plays a critical role in ensuring that European policymaking is informed by robust, independent, and interdisciplinary scientific evidence. This talk offers a perspective on SAM, its operating principles and contribution to high level decision making across the EU. Drawing on experiences from chairing the Group of Chief Scientific Advisors, it reflects on the opportunities and challenges of delivering timely, transparent, and policy relevant advice in an era of rapidly advancing technologies and increasing societal complexity. The talk highlights lessons learned, from fostering trust and scientific integrity to enabling effective engagement between experts, policymakers, and citizens, and outlines future priorities for strengthening evidence informed governance in Europe.

Professor Nicole Grobert

Professor Nicole Grobert

University of Oxford, UK

14:30-14:55 Coffee break
14:55-15:25 Science as a global public good: Perspectives from and outlooks for Africa

Since its adoption in 2015, the UN’s Agenda 2030, with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has served as a convenient and powerful narrative for framing the ‘global public good’ role of contemporary science. It has been accompanied by impact strategies that emphasize open access to knowledge, meaningful engagement with societal stakeholders as knowledge partners in the co-creation of actionable knowledge, diversity, equity and inclusion in research, decision making and leadership, and international scientific collaboration. This is true in Africa as elsewhere in the world: despite significant challenges to the implementation capacities of African science systems, SDG-oriented global challenge priorities and open, engaged, equitable, collaborative research approaches pervade national/regional and institutional science and funding policies across the continent.

The optimism about a new world order based on common purpose (global challenges) and shared value (leave no one behind) with which Agenda 2030 was launched has given way to alarm about the hopelessly inadequate progress on achieving the SDGs and the cascading threats of a world that now finds itself in so-called polycrisis mode. Pursuing urgent and, preferably, transformative ‘course corrections’ is the new order of the day for both science and society. What such corrections might entail remains unclear, but it does suggest the need to rethink our current understanding of the ‘global public good’ role of science. In Africa this creates an opportunity for science policy makers, funders and other science system leaders to develop the ‘public good’ role of science in African societies, and to do so in ways that reposition African science as a voice of inspiration and influence on the global stage.

Professor Heide Hackmann

Professor Heide Hackmann

Stellenbosch University, South Africa

15:25-15:55 Can we sustain science as a global public good in a “wrecking ball” world?

Even before the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, this year’s Munich Security Conference described the world as being at an inflection point with longstanding alliances called into question, the rules-based international order eroding and mounting instability and escalating conflicts across the globe. Indeed, the main report produced ahead of the conference was called “Under Destruction”and it argued that “the world has entered a period of wrecking-ball politics”. The question is therefore how the ideal of science as a global public good can survive in this new world order. I will argue that certain key principles can still guide us when trying to build and maintain resilient national and international research and innovation systems. It may be necessary, and even desirable to achieve "competitiveness", "strategic autonomy", and "security" but they will not come for free. Decisionmakers need to understand the trade-offs of trying to go it alone. Hopefully, such an understanding will allow calmer heads to prevail and create a space for open science to survive, not out of a sense of idealism but from a clear eyed understanding of how research and innovation work in reality.

Professor Maria Leptin FRS

Professor Maria Leptin FRS

President of European Research Council

15:55-16:10 Coffee break
16:10-16:55 Roundtable: Policy perspectives

Discussion led by Chair, Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

Professor Geoffrey Boulton FRS

Edinburgh University

Professor Lord David Willetts FRS

Professor Lord David Willetts FRS

Resolution Foundation, UK

Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf FRS

Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf FRS

University of Amsterdam, Netherlands

Professor Heide Hackmann

Professor Heide Hackmann

Stellenbosch University, South Africa

Professor Maria Leptin FRS

Professor Maria Leptin FRS

President of European Research Council

16:55-17:00 Closing remarks
17:00-17:00 Close