Will Europe become the new home for US researchers affected by policy shifts?

As U.S. budget cuts and freezes push healthcare and biopharma research in the States towards uncertainty, could Europe be the destination that science talent flocks towards? That’s what the European Union (EU) hopes will happen and has now introduced a new policy to enact this plan.

The European Commission pledged €500 million ($562.78 million) in funding as part of the Choose Europe for Science initiative launched this month in a move to attract U.S. researchers. 

What are the EU’s plans to poach international science talent ?

Speaking at an event in Paris, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, said that the funding would make Europe a “magnet” and help support the “best and the brightest researchers and scientists from Europe and around the world.

von der Leyen also urged EU nations to invest 3% of their country’s gross domestic product (GDP) in research and development (R&D) by 2030, stating that investing in science is an investment into Europe’s future.

As the EU seeks to bring in science talents from other countries, particularly the U.S., the half a billion euros would fund research projects and pay for universities to cover their costs. The scheme will also link up researchers with research institutions, but what exactly the game plan is, is not yet known.

The initiative comes under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions program, named after the Polish scientist known for her work in the field of radioactivity. The funding program is aimed at those who want to pursue doctoral education and postdoctoral training. As part of the scheme, researchers will receive higher allowances and be placed on longer contracts.

The funding will last for the next two years, and the hope is that this will drive research interest in “frontier fields,” such as artificial intelligence (AI). While much wasn’t disclosed about the focus of R&D, “targeted incentives” will be directed towards developing these fields in Europe.

Can Europe overcome its challenges as a leader in R&D?

This is also meant to fast-track the launch of startups and scaleups by removing regulatory barriers that currently exist. A 2024 report by the EC revealed some of these challenges. For instance, there are different rules for launching and scaling companies across member states in Europe. These regulations vary from country to country, be it about registration, tax compliance, or bankruptcy.

As navigating this can become cumbersome for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), time may be spent figuring out the laws rather than focusing on innovation and growth. Furthermore, the report stated that Europe lags behind global markets in retaining science talent. This is mainly because of labor regulations, lengthy visa processes, and salary structures that make it harder for startups to build opportunities for employees when compared to regions like the U.S. and China.

This holds true for the healthcare and biotech industry. Europe has been struggling to turn its research into industrial projects, according to a report by Coface. Three years ago, 17% of clinical trials took place in Europe but were swiftly overtaken by China, which went from 9% in 2017 to 20% in 2022. Europe has also grappled for access to venture capital funds, as many are less inclined to invest in early-stage biotechs to minimize risk. That’s why young biotechs in Europe seek foreign funding, especially from the U.S., which is a hotbed for venture capital.

Funding in the U.S. has been unmatched, with 583 biotechs in 2023 gathering $56.79 billion in total. In China, biotechs secured $20.61 billion among just 69 firms. This is a stark difference from Europe’s $11.46 billion among 229 companies the same year.

Are US science talents looking for a new home to advance research?

The new initiative hopes to reform this. Moreover, it looks to lure scientists who have been let down by recent federal funding cuts in the U.S. Agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF), which supports fundamental research in science and engineering, is incurring a 56% slash in funding, which will come into effect in October. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) will also be hit with around a 40% cut and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would suffer a 55% budget reduction.

Further, U.S. universities have been severely impacted. The federal government is investigating more than 50 universities as part of its anti-DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) crackdown. Ivy Leagues like Harvard, Columbia, and Princeton have been forced to trim down expenses and pause research. The Trump administration snipped $400 million in funding from Columbia, which has lost more than 300 grants. A week ago, nearly 180 researchers were laid off by the university.

Meanwhile, Harvard University was hit with a steep research funding freeze – $2.2 billion to be exact. Several researchers at the school received stop-work orders, one of whom was Sarah Fortune, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health. Fortune had been researching tuberculosis for over a decade and was involved in a $60 million research project. Part of the research was a vaccine study on primates, whose lives are now at risk as the team scrambles for funds to support them and prevent them from being euthanized.

Another study that the school has stalled is focused on treatments for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells. David Walt, a professor at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital running the ALS project, said in an interview with CNN that “this cancellation will cost lives.”

Now, the Massachusetts-based Ivy League is suing the Trump administration, claiming that its federal funding freeze is unlawful.

Similarly, several universities have had their research funding cut. Illinois-based Northwestern University’s spokesperson Jon Yates said that scientific research was “at jeopardy” after the government froze about $790 million in funding. As for the University of Pennsylvania, the federal government chopped off $175 million from its research budget, citing the school’s policies on transgender athletes. 

The school pointed out that the freezes and cancellations would threaten lifesaving and life-improving research, “the loss of which will be felt by society,” in a press release. “Understandably, we are hearing concerns not only from scientists affected directly, but more broadly from students and young faculty embarking on careers in research.”

As federal research dries up, an open statement signed by 1,900 scientists warned that a “climate of fear has descended on the research community.” 

The statement read: “Researchers, afraid of losing their funding or job security, are removing their names from publications, abandoning studies, and rewriting grant proposals and papers to remove scientifically accurate terms that agencies are flagging as objectionable. Although some in the scientific community have protested vocally, most researchers, universities, research institutions, and professional organizations have kept silent to avoid antagonizing the administration and jeopardizing their funding.”

France, The Netherlands, Belgium strive to draw in foreign science talent

These issues may be all the more reasons for the EU to tempt researchers in the U.S. to move to Europe. This was expressed by von der Leyen, who claimed that the initiative would guarantee academic freedom to scientists. This comes as France launched its “Choose France for Science” platform to “tackle the attacks against academic freedoms throughout the world” last month. 

According to the Agence nationale de la recherche – the country’s national agency for research – it will prioritize research in health, climate, biodiversity, sustainable societies, digital technology and artificial intelligence, space studies, agriculture, sustainable food, forests, and natural resources. Up to 50% of overall costs per project may be funded by the state.

France isn’t the only European country that has its eyes on foreign researchers. Twelve countries, such as France, the Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Spain, Slovenia, Germany, Greece, Bulgaria, and Romania penned a letter that suggested ways to attract researchers through funding and coming up with an immigration framework.

Meanwhile, in Belgium, the Free University Brussels announced 12 new postdoctoral positions for international researchers – mainly based in the U.S. – as part of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie program. It will mete out €2.5 million ($2.7 million) in funding as part of the scheme. It has also vowed to provide 18 apartments for international researchers seeking temporary residence. 

The Netherlands government is also establishing a fund to offer scientific refuge to U.S.-based researchers. The country’s Education Minister Eppo Bruins said in a letter to parliament: “There is currently a great global demand for international top scientific talent. At the same time, the geopolitical climate is changing, which is currently increasing the international mobility of scientists.”

Particularly in healthcare and biotech, the Netherlands has grown to be one of Europe’s leading hubs. It is home to around 1,979 life sciences companies, including several well-known biotech companies, like Amsterdam-based uniQure, which developed Hemgenix, the first approved gene therapy for hemophilia B. So, it looks like the country could, in fact, offer a haven for scientists fleeing restrictive policy.

Carsten Brinkschulte, chief executive officer (CEO) of Dryad Networks, a Berlin-based tech company developing wildfire detectors, thinks that the EU is honing itself to be a game-changer in scientific research amid funding cuts and uncertainty.

“The planned cut in funding of science will affect business in a profound way, slowing down economic progress not just in the US, but worldwide. There’s no surprise that the EU is now positioning itself as a science superpower. This may be a historic opportunity to bring back and accelerate long-term, science-driven economic growth to the EU by attracting U.S. talent to Europe and building deep tech businesses on the results,” said Brinkschulte.

The Choose Europe for Science mission was launched on the heels of Horizon Europe, the EU’s main funding program for research and innovation, with firepower of more than €93 billion ($104.90 million). Horizon has sponsored pioneering research in a range of fields. Also, the EU-funded NANOFACTS project at Serbia’s BioSense Institute (BIOS) has been key in improving cancer care. It is studying the use of chlorotoxin, a peptide present in scorpion venom, to target glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a deadly form of brain cancer. Drug delivery has also been a focus of some Horizon-backed projects.

With research opportunities in the U.S. thought to be in peril at the moment, Europe could be a home for scientists abroad. But how the region will overcome its own shortcomings and whether it will truly beat the U.S.’ longstanding hold on scientific research will be something to watch out for.