Breakthrough Prize Opens 2026 Public Nominations in Partnership with ALLEA

The nomination period is now open for the 2026 Breakthrough Prizes in Fundamental Physics, Life Sciences, and Mathematics. Regarded as the world’s most prestigious science awards, the Breakthrough Prizes recognise transformative achievements across key scientific disciplines. Nominations can be submitted online via breakthroughprize.org until 11 July 2025.

Now in its 14th year, the Breakthrough Prize continues to spotlight leading minds in science, offering individual awards of $3 million in each of the three main categories. Additional awards include the New Horizons Prizes for early-career researchers and the Maryam Mirzakhani New Frontiers Prizes for early-career women mathematicians.

For the tenth year, the Breakthrough Prize partners with ALLEA to engage the European scientific community and support the nomination process. ALLEA’s involvement reflects its ongoing commitment to recognising scientific excellence and advancing international cooperation in research. Through this partnership, ALLEA helps ensure that the diversity and breadth of European researchers are represented in this global initiative.

Winners of the 2025 Breakthrough Prizes were announced earlier this month during the globally televised gala ceremony, often referred to as “The Oscars of Science”. The 2026 laureates will be celebrated at the next annual event in a similar format.

For more information on the nomination process, prize categories, and eligibility criteria, please visit breakthroughprize.org.

How Can We Build a Scientifically Literate Society?

What does it mean to be scientifically literate in today’s world? How can we ensure that young people are not only equipped with knowledge but also with the ethical understanding needed to navigate an increasingly complex, science-driven society? Dr. Cliona Murphy, Chair of the ALLEA Working Group on Science Education and principal author of the ALLEA statement on shaping a scientifically literate society, explored with us these critical questions. In this ALLEA Digital Salon exclusive, she stresses need to integrate the Nature of Science (NoS) and research ethics into early science education, and how such an approach can empower future generations to make informed, responsible decisions in a rapidly changing world.

Q: Why did you and the Working Group decide to write this statement advocating for the inclusion of the Nature of Science and Ethics in early science education?

Cliona Murphy: Now more than ever, with increasingly challenging issues like climate change, sustainability, the energy crisis, and the ongoing Covid pandemic (and the growing likelihood of novel epidemics), there’s a growing need for society to make sure citizens have a good understanding of science, its methodologies, and its application to their everyday lives. This understanding would help citizens make sense of a range of science-related issues and enable them to make informed choices. Throughout history, scientific progress has always faced ethical dilemmas and that remains the case today; if we think about morally complex phenomena like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and genome editing, it’s even more important that our young people develop the ability to identify and navigate these ethical challenges.

Dr. Cliona Murphy is an Chair of the ALLEA Working Group on Science Education, and Associate Professor in Science Education at Dublin City University’s School of STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies within the Institute of Education.

Science is included in virtually all primary and post-primary curricula. However, these curricula often do not include learning outcomes to support students’ understanding about issues related to what science is, or how scientists work, nor do they typically address ethical issues related to scientific inquiry. This kind of content is more typical of programmes at the tertiary level.

As the vast majority of students worldwide are not opting to study science at the undergraduate or postgraduate level, most young people do not learn about the ‘Nature of Science’ (NoS) nor do they learn about the importance of integrity and reliability in scientific research at school. We decided to write this statement to champion for strengthening the role of formal science education in improving societal understanding of the NoS and research ethics. We believe that including NoS and research ethics into early science education can lay the foundation for equipping our young citizens with the knowledge, skills, and ethical values necessary to become discerning, critical, accountable, and ethically aware members of society.

Q: Could you explain what the ‘Nature of Science’ is in simple terms, and why it is relevant to those outside of the STEM fields?

CM: The term “Nature of Science” (NoS) relates to science as a way of knowing or the values and beliefs that are essential to the development of scientific knowledge. NoS is really an understanding about what science is and how it works. For example, when students learn about NoS in school they learn about science as a process rather than solely a collection of facts. They learn about different characteristics of science. For example, they learn about uncertainty in science. That science knowledge is tentative and subject to change in light of new evidence or more refined theories. They learn about how scientific theories and models are constantly changing as our understanding of the natural world develops. They learn that although science is grounded in evidence, scientists also use their creativity when developing hypotheses, devising experiments, when interpreting evidence and developing theories. They learn how science is influenced by cultural, economic, and political factors. When students learn about NoS they also learn about the importance of integrity, honesty and transparency in scientists’ work.

This kind of knowledge about science, about the NoS is important for all citizens, not just those in STEM fields. For our youngest citizens an understanding of the NoS helps them make better links between school science and science in the real world.  It also helps them to understand that doubt, debate and uncertainty are all essential parts of developing science knowledge. This kind of knowledge could play an important role in increasing public understanding of the challenges that are inherent for scientists and policymakers when managing a crisis.

Also, nowadays social media has hugely altered how we share information, knowledge, and ideas. Previously we relied on newspapers as trusted sources of information.  Nowadays, virtually anyone can widely share views or ideas without providing evidence to back up their ideas. While this creates many opportunities for integrating science into society it also causes challenges as we have to be more critical and must question which information sources we should trust.

For our youngest citizens an understanding of the NoS helps them make better links between school science and science in the real world.  It also helps them to understand that doubt, debate and uncertainty are all essential parts of developing science knowledge. This kind of knowledge could play an important role in increasing public understanding of the challenges that are inherent for scientists and policymakers when managing a crisis.

Developing a deeper understanding of the NOS, including for example, who qualifies as an expert, why scientists sometimes disagree or what scientists’ motivations are can help us recognise reliable sources and understand how science can be manipulated, making society less vulnerable to misinformation.

Q: What would you say are the primary benefits of expanding primary and post-primary science education to include research ethics?

CM: In my view there are many advantages to including research ethics into primary and secondary science education. Firstly, as we discussed in the Working Group statement, giving young people the opportunity to reflect on values and ethics from an early age supports them  in developing their moral character and provides guidance for their behaviour as they grow up. It can empower them to make ethical decisions by giving them a way to assess the ethical aspects of different situations, helping them to act responsibly, with compassion, and ethically throughout their lives.

When young people are given the opportunity to study research ethics, they can also learn how to evaluate the ethical implications of scientific research and critically reflect on societal impacts of science and technology. In this way they are being given a chance to develop their critical thinking skills. Adding research ethics to science curricula also has the benefit of instilling values like integrity, honesty, transparency, and responsibility in students when they conduct scientific research. This has the potential to help students build and maintain trust in scientific research, which is important for society to accept and apply scientific findings. Learning about research ethics can also promotes global citizenship in that it encourages students to consider ethical issues across cultural and geographical boundaries.  I suppose taking all these factors into consideration I think that integrating research ethics into primary and post-primary science education ultimately can contribute to the development of well-rounded and ethically minded scientists and citizens.

Q: What would you say are the main challenges to reforming or expanding early science education curricula to include these concepts? How can teachers be better supported to expand science education curricula to include the NOS and research ethics?

CM: I would say the main challenges to expanding science education curricula to include NoS and research ethics would be things like, overloaded science curricula, assessment in science, teachers not having sufficient understanding of NoS and research ethics as they relate to science education and teachers’ lack of knowledge of teaching methods to support students’ learning in these areas.

In terms of addressing these challenges I think that learning outcomes related to NoS and research ethics need to be clearly defined in science curricula. However, rather than adding and expanding content to already substantive curricula this new content should be included by focussing on learning outcomes and content in existing science education curricula.

Teaching about NoS and research ethics will be new territory for many teachers and will require slightly different skillsets and methodologies than those teachers are currently using. Instead of carrying out experiments to get the ‘right answer’, teachers would have to support students in understanding that when they are discussing ethical issues they don’t always have to come up with a conclusion or ‘the right answer’. Instead, teachers will have to give students a chance to reflect on their values and provide evidence-based arguments to back up their viewpoints.

To support teachers in using these methodologies initial teacher education (ITE) and continuous professional learning (CPL) programmes will need to be developed and rolled out to ensure that teachers feel confident and competent in supporting students’ learning about NoS and research ethics.

Other initiatives like providing teachers with opportunities to take part in National and European conferences or networking events would also be useful in helping teachers keep UpToDate on developments in science and research ethics. These events would also give teachers the chance to collaborate with each other and share their experiences which also would be very useful for teachers professional learning.

Educational resources that provide teachers with examples of pedagogies and ideas for teaching about NoS and research ethics would also be required particularly when teachers initially start teaching about NoS and research ethics

Finally, if NoS and research ethics are to be effectively integrated and taught as part of science curricula, national and European National and European education policies that that firmly embed these pedagogies within education policy frameworks need to be developed.

Q: Beyond including the NOS and research ethics into primary and post-primary science education curricula, what are some reforms to science education that you would like to see in the immediate and long-term?

CM: That’s a big question, how long have you got?  Well, I suppose one thing is in relation to STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics) education. STEM education is teaching and learning the STEM disciplines in an integrated way, an approach that is becoming increasingly more common throughout Europe. There is broad agreement that providing students opportunities to learn the STEM disciplines in an integrated way can enhance students’ disciplinary knowledge, develop their scientific inquiry and problem-solving skills and can develop more general competences including digital, communication, creativity and empathy. While there are many benefits to integrated STEM there are challenges that include for example, limited definitions of what STEM education is and a lack of research-informed pedagogies and frameworks to support teachers to effectively implement integrated STEM approaches or projects in their classrooms. There’s also the challenge that when poor quality STEM approaches are used, this can have a particularly negative impact on students’ learning in science and mathematics. I think therefore that if integrated STEM approaches are to be effective it is crucial that exemplars and frameworks of good STEM projects and approaches that highlight key disciplinary and STEM processes need to be developed. Educational materials to support teachers in teaching STEM also need to be developed. But arguably the most important thing that is required is that initial teacher education and continuing professional learning modules in STEM education are developed and made available for teachers.

On a final note, it’s often common that when new national or international policies and initiatives aimed at enhancing teaching and learning in science or STEM are rolled out teachers aren’t automatically in the loop. This could because of issues like poor communication, insufficient opportunities for professional learning or heavy workloads.  I think that structures and initiatives that would allow science educators, teachers, and researchers to get more involved in shaping European and National science education policies need to be set up.  So, for example structures that would support them having input into curriculum design, teaching methodologies and the development of ITE and CPL programmes.

About Cliona Murphy

Dr. Cliona Murphy is an Chair of the ALLEA Working Group on Science Education, and Associate Professor in Science Education at Dublin City University’s School of STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies within the Institute of Education. She is deeply committed to teacher education, focusing on empowering both student and practising teachers to enhance their confidence, skills, and passion for teaching science. Cliona has a strong research background and has contributed significantly to the fields of Nature of Science, Inquiry-Based Science Education, Education for Sustainability, and Climate Change Education.

 

 

ALLEA Stands Up for Science in Solidarity with the U.S. Research Community

Today, as the U.S. research community marches to defend science, ALLEA stands in solidarity with researchers around the world in the effort to safeguard academic freedom and protect the integrity of international research collaboration. The current threats to academic freedom in the U.S. — including research funding freezes and censorship in climate science, gender studies, and public health — pose disastrous risks to global scientific collaboration.

These actions not only harm U.S. researchers but also undermine the global scientific community, which relies on the open exchange of knowledge and cross-border collaboration. As science is a global public good, and a collaborative resource, these restrictions threaten the very foundation of international research efforts.

The human right to participate in science extends beyond the right to engage in scientific practice and its benefits; it also encompasses the right to be involved in the organisation and institution of science itself. This right to participate must be equal, as it represents a special form of the right to democratic self-determination

This situation requires an immediate yet thoughtful response that highlights core scientific values and reinforces the fundamental conditions necessary for robust research. These include academic freedom and autonomy, open collaboration, and the free exchange of knowledge within the scientific community. Moreover, it is essential to uphold the free movement and mobility of researchers, respect for evidence, research integrity, and acknowledgment of uncertainty and complexity — all of which are foundational to the advancement of science.

ALLEA issued a statement in February 2025 expressing grave concern over the threats to academic freedom in the U.S., warning of the broader repercussions for science worldwide. Already endorsed by numerous research institutions, European academies, CNRS (France), Independent SAGE (UK), and Science Europe, the statement has received widespread attention, including coverage by Nature.

We now ask you to Stand Up for Science to protect the integrity of research and safeguard the future of global scientific collaboration. You can support this effort by:

For a full list of institutional endorsers, please see.

European Research Community Joins ALLEA in Standing Up for Academic Freedom and Against Recent U.S. Actions

Berlin, 27 February 2025 – The European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities (ALLEA) released a statement expressing grave concern over the growing threats to academic freedom in the United States, warning of the significant global repercussions for science and international research collaboration. The statement has since received significant and widespread support from science organisations across Europe.

The statement came in response to the recent executive orders and legislative measures in the U.S. that have led to disruptions and insecurity in research funding, as well as censorship of scholarly pursuits concerning research in fields such as climate science, gender studies, and public health. Billions in federal research funding have been frozen, forcing many U.S. science agencies and research institutions to suspend or curtail operations.

These actions do not just affect researchers in the U.S., but around the world, because science is a global, collaborative enterprise. ALLEA warns that restrictions on particular research topics and methodologies by the new administration negatively impact transatlantic data sharing and open exchange of ideas, thereby threatening decades of collaborative research between the U.S. and Europe, and potentially setting back scientific progress in critical areas.

As Professor Karin Roelofs, ALLEA Board Member and principal author of the statement puts it, “The silence around threats to academic freedom and international research collaboration is deafening. With this statement, we call upon national governments and international organisations to stand with the research community in remaining vigilant of these challenges. It is now time to join forces to safeguard academic freedom.

In answer to this call for solidarity, the statement has already been endorsed by almost 50 research institutions, representing the unwavering commitment of the research community to safeguarding academic freedom, which is a key pillar of democratic societies. In addition to European academies of sciences and humanities, prominent research performing and funding organisations such as CNRS (France), independent SAGE (UK), and Science Europe are among the signatories. For a full list of signatories, see here.

ALLEA further urges policymakers in Europe and beyond to reinforce international agreements that protect open scientific collaboration, ensuring that political agendas do not dictate the course of research. As ALLEA President Pawel Rowiński adds, “Academic freedom is the backbone of scientific progress and indeed foundational to a free society. The latest actions by the new U.S. administration threaten the integrity and autonomy of research and disrupt public trust in science not just within the country but worldwide. Europe must stand firm in safeguarding independent research and stay committed to fostering an open and collaborative science ecosystem, thus ensuring that we remain a place where scholars can safely work, free from political interference.


For media inquiries, please contact us at:

Email: secretariat@allea.org

Tel: +49 (0)30-20 60 66 500

ALLEA Reaffirms Solidarity with the Ukrainian Science Community After Three Years of War

Three years have passed since the beginning of Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine—a period marked by atrocities against the Ukrainian people and immense challenges for its scientific community. ALLEA reaffirms its unwavering solidarity with Ukraine’s scholars and scientists and with its academic institutions, especially our member, the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.

Since the conflict began, ALLEA has taken a clear and principled stance supporting Ukraine’s academic sector, while advocating for accountability and justice within the international scientific community. In response to the crisis, we implemented the European Fund for Displaced Scientists (EFDS), which provided essential resources to Ukrainian researchers forced to flee their homes, as well as to Ukrainian scientific institutions to continue their research efforts amidst the war. Collaborative efforts, such as our conferences with the International Science Council (ISC), further provided platforms to address the ongoing challenges faced by the Ukrainian academic system and to foster global solidarity.

ALLEA remains committed to long-term initiatives like the 10-Point Action Plan to Support the Ukrainian Academic System, which outlines essential steps for preserving and rebuilding Ukraine’s scientific infrastructure. As ALLEA President Paweł Rowiński stated, “It is our shared responsibility to ensure that Ukrainian researchers are supported not only in the short term but also as part of broader efforts to sustain and rebuild their academic institutions.”

On this sombre occasion, ALLEA reaffirms its commitment to support the resilience and perseverance of Ukraine’s scientific community. We will continue to stand with Ukrainian researchers and institutions, advocating for their freedom, safety, and ability to contribute to the global scientific endeavour.

ALLEA Publishes Statement Responding to Recent U.S. Restrictions on Academic Freedom

On 19 February, ALLEA published a new Statement expressing grave concern over recent developments in the U.S. affecting the autonomy of scientific research, including funding freezes and blatant censorship around language, research topics, and methodologies. These actions not only threaten the integrity of scientific and scholarly work within the U.S. but also have far-reaching consequences for global research collaboration and scientific progress as a whole. This statement underscores the critical role of academic freedom in democratic societies and calls for collective efforts to safeguard research autonomy worldwide. 

ALLEA called on its members, partners, and like-minded organisations, and urged national governments and international institutions in the U.S., Europe and beyond to remain vigilant and strengthen ongoing efforts to safeguard academic freedom and institutional autonomy. 

We invite our stakeholders in the research community and beyond to show your solidarity with this effort to stand up against undue interference in the scientific endeavour, by:

  • Endorsing the statement as an academy or institution. 
  • Sharing it with your networks to raise awareness. 
  • Engaging with national and regional policymakers to reinforce the importance of academic freedom. 

Read the Statement in full here.

ALLEA Calls for Ethical Safeguards in Research Collaborations with Commercial Entities

In a statement published today, ALLEA, the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities, addresses key ethical concerns arising from research collaborations with commercial entities. The statement highlights the need for greater transparency, accountability, and safeguards to ensure that academic research maintains its integrity and serves the public good.

As part of its longstanding commitment to research ethics and integrity, ALLEA calls on European and national policymakers, academic institutions, and funding bodies to adopt clear ethical guidelines for collaborations with industry partners.

Towards a Responsible Framework for Research Collaborations

ALLEA’s statement builds on extensive discussions within its Member Academies and the broader scientific community, identifying critical challenges in partnerships between academia and commercial enterprises. The statement underscores the importance of safeguarding academic independence while fostering innovation in research.

The ethical concerns outlined in the statement include potential conflicts of interest, issues related to data ownership and accessibility, and the risk of undue influence on research agendas. ALLEA stresses that addressing these challenges is crucial to ensuring that research collaborations remain beneficial to society as a whole.

Key Considerations from ALLEA’s Statement:

  • Preserving Academic Independence: Research collaborations should not compromise the autonomy of academic institutions or researchers.
  • Ensuring Transparency and Accountability: Clear guidelines on data ownership, intellectual property rights, and funding sources are essential to maintaining trust in scientific research.
  • Managing Conflicts of Interest: Institutions and researchers must implement safeguards to prevent undue influence from commercial partners.
  • Aligning Research with the Public Interest: Academic research should prioritise societal benefits and ethical considerations over purely commercial objectives.

ALLEA’s Commitment

This ALLEA statement has been prepared by ALLEA’s Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics. Through its Working and Expert Groups, ALLEA provides input on behalf of European academies on pressing societal, scientific, and science-policy debates and their underlying legislations. With its work, ALLEA seeks to ensure that science and research in Europe can excel and serve the interests of society.

The full statement, “ALLEA Statement on Ethical Problems in Research Collaborations with Commercial Entities,” is available here.

ALLEA Reaffirms Its Decision to Cease Communication on X and Its Commitment to Tackling Science Disinformation

ALLEA made the decision to discontinue communication on X, formerly known as Twitter, in January 2024, reflecting our careful consideration of the platform’s evolving policies and their increasing non-alignment with our mission to support science as a global public good and to promote high ethical standards.

One year later, we firmly stand by this decision, reiterating that scientific integrity is based on facts and evidence and reaffirming our commitment to tackling science mis- and disinformation. We welcome the increasing awareness amongst academic, civil society and governmental organisations concerning the use of social media channels, accelerated by recent political shifts across the globe.

In this climate, ALLEA expresses its unwavering support for its academic partners and networks in defending trustworthy and ethically sound science, evidence-based decision-making, and the independent and impartial sharing of information.

The ways we communicate and the platforms we choose for information sharing and exchange must align with our values and further our mission to advance science for the public good, free from undue political or commercial interference and disinformation.

We encourage our members and partners to stay connected with ALLEA by joining us on LinkedIn and Mastodon, and subscribing to our newsletter for continued updates.

Maintaining the Autonomy of the ERC: A Cornerstone of Europe’s Research Excellence

Amid the ongoing debate surrounding the leaked European Commission’s communication on the “Competitive Compass for the EU”, ALLEA echoes widespread concerns about potential risks to the European Research Council (ERC)’s autonomy.

ALLEA has consistently argued that the independence of the European Research Council (ERC) is fundamental to Europe’s ability to drive groundbreaking innovation through basic and fundamental research.

ERC President Maria Leptin has rightly emphasised the need to shield frontier research from short-term political and economic priorities.  We agree that Europe’s ability to remain competitive globally depends on ensuring that curiosity-driven research continues to thrive, as she pointed out recently, at the World Economic Forum.

We therefore recall and welcome the EU Competitiveness Council’s note from 26 November 2024 – which strongly reaffirmed the importance of preserving the ERC’s independent governance and implementation structure –, reiterate our commitment to scientific excellence as the guiding principle for European R&I (funding) policies, and stand firmly with the ERC in ensuring that independent, high-quality research remains at the heart of Europe’s innovation ecosystem.

You can read the EU Competitiveness Council’s note here.

Event Report – Decoding Polarisation in Debates on Sustainable Food Systems

A 3-part workshop series focused on developing tools to depolarise conversations on sustainable food systems comes to an end.

Between October and December 2024, ALLEA, in partnership with Re-Imagine Europa, organised a 3-part online workshop series, titled, Decoding Polarisation in Debates on Sustainable Food Systems. The invite-only event included diverse stakeholders, such as farmers, academics, activists, and policymakers, who came together to dive deep into the question, “How can we have more constructive conversations on sustainable food systems in Europe that lead to mutually-beneficial and innovative solutions?”

The hands-on and interactive workshops built on each other as they explored the “who”, “what”, “where”, and “why” of  the current state of polarisation, and finally the “how” of depolarising these critical conversations to arrive at innovative solutions for an inclusive and equitable future.

Workshop 1

 Actors and Agendas – Analysing “Who” are the Players in Sustainable Food Systems and “What” are their Interests

In the first workshop, participants mapped the different stakeholders in European food systems and discussed the different interests and agendas of these stakeholders, as well as their varying ideas of what “sustainability” means, in order to find common ground as well as their legitimate divergences. The first speaker, Barbara Gallani, Head of the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) Communication and Partnerships (ENGAGE) Department, presented work that EFSA had done on stakeholder mapping and identified discourses on food using social media data. She noted that by collecting such data on the prevailing narratives and discourses, communication efforts on controversial topics could be improved. The second speaker, Sir Charles Godfray, Director, Oxford Martin School, began his presentation by asking the slightly provocative question, “Is agreement on land-use policy in the UK and Europe achievable?” The participants were asked to debate whether, and how, agricultural intensification can coexist with conservation and biodiversity preservation efforts. In addition to the speaker presentations, participants debated the complexities of trying to build consensus among the diversity of stakeholders in European food systems, without squashing dissent and or legitimate disagreement on goals, values, and methods.

Workshop 2

Roots of Polarisation – Revealing the “Why”  

After the workshop on identifying the actors, participants were tasked with discovering the ‘roots’, i.e., the underlying social and contextual drivers, of the current state of polarisation on sustainable food systems. The session included presentations by Prof Bobby Duffy, Director of the Policy Institute at King’s College London, and Mario Scharfbillig, Science for Policy Analyst at the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). Prof Duffy presented insights into the varying polarisation models , both affective and issue-based, in the literature and invited participants to analyse which might apply to the debates on food systems in Europe. Participants also looked into how issues on sustainable food are increasingly being looked at through a ‘culture war’ lens and discussed how this could be mitigated. Mario Scharfbillig then presented the latest research from the JRC on ‘Trustworthy Public Communication’, inviting participants to think about how to enable a paradigm shift – from influencing to empowering public debates on “contentious” topics. With a disclaimer that more effective communication is not the only tool to combat polarisation, Scharfbillig shared the report’s recommendations on how to talk to the public in a way that builds, and retains, trust.

Workshop 3

Depolarisation Tools and Solutions – Discovering “How” to Have Constructive Conversations on Sustainable Food Systems

In the final workshop, participants were tasked with discussing and developing depolarisation tools and methodologies. The session included presentations by Prof Stephan Lewandowsky, Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Bristol and Prof Bram Büscher, Professor and Chair at the Sociology of Development and Change group, Wageningen University. Prof Lewandowsky, who was previously a part of ALLEA’s PERITIA project on building trust in expertise, shared his research into combatting mis- and disinformation, particularly through the use of ‘inoculation’ science, along with real-life examples of such methodologies at work. Prof Büscher then shared his insights into the power structures that underpin polarisation with a look at conservation and environmentalism in the era of post-truth politics and platform Capitalism. He stressed that there was a pressing need to build alternative networks to the hegemony of the digital space, which could be harnessed for goals such as environmental and food sustainability. Participants then debated if/how inoculation methods could be applied to controversial topics in sustainable food systems, such as new genomic techniques (NGTs), and further discussed how to build alternative networks dedicated to making food more sustainable.

A more detailed report with key insights from the workshop series will be published in Spring 2025.