When Pascal Wilmann was awarded a fellowship in 2007 by
the Australian government, accepting it seemed the perfect move
after his first year as a postdoc at the University of Nottingham in the
U.K. The prestigious award would allow him to stay in the same
department at Nottingham and choose his own research direction.
Unfortunately, Wilmann hadn't allowed for the slow, dogged mills of
government bureaucracy. An Australian, he had arrived in the United
Kingdom for his postdoc in August 2006 on a work permit--itself the
result of a lengthy process strewn with paperwork. Although he
wouldn't be changing universities for the fellowship, he had
changed employers in the eyes of the U.K. government.
"As my fellowship was not funded through the university, my
employment visa was no longer valid even though I was still working
there," explains Wilmann, who researches protein structure in the
university's department of pharmacy.
"It is not enough to make European research more attractive. We
also need to make the working environment more attractive."
--Massimo Serpieri, DG Research, European Commission
After a 5-month process, Wilmann's new visa came through in late
September, just before his fellowship started in October. Then,
just a few weeks later, a letter from the Home Office arrived, telling
him that his visa had been canceled and that he had 6 weeks to
leave the United Kingdom. "We had just bought tickets for a holiday
weekend in Spain, and I was worried they might not let me back into
the country," he says.
It turned out that when the Home Office had called the
University of Nottingham to check Wilmann's employment status, it
was told that he was not on the payroll, because he was now being
paid by the Australian government. So, it canceled his visa. "This
was a real unnecessary stress for us for a number of weeks until it
was sorted out," says Tania Hansen, Wilmann's fiancée, who moved
from Australia with Wilmann to take a position at the University of Leicester .
Wilmann's experience goes to the heart of an increasingly vocal
debate over the immigration status and mobility of international
scientists into and within Europe. These processes won't ever be
light on paperwork. But the unique nomadic existence of many
postdocs and the need to travel for research purposes has led many
to argue that, for scientists, a different approach is needed that
can facilitate their mobility into Europe and between positions in
different European countries.
"We need to attract more researchers to Europe," says Massimo
Serpieri, a policy officer in the European Commission's Directorate-General for
Research . "However, it is not enough to make European research
more attractive. We also need to make the working environment more
attractive."
A growing discontent
Wei Shen, a member of the Mobility Working Group of Eurodoc , a Europe-wide federation
representing Ph.D. students and young researchers, agrees that
mobility is the key issue that needs to be integrated into the
E.U.'s research policy. Shen is a Chinese national who has studied
and researched across Europe for the past 8 years. In his current
position at the ESSCA Graduate
School of Management in Angers, France, he examines
international migration, particularly among students and highly
skilled migrants. Many international researchers are attracted by
Europe's diversity of research opportunities across different
geographical and cultural settings, Shen says. However, the tight
and idiosyncratic approach to immigration across the continent is
off-putting to many.
"The general feeling is the process is not straightforward and
really varies from country to country," Shen says. "Administrative
barriers are the main issue. For the U.K., you need to apply for a
work permit and then the entry visa, but for other countries, it
may go through quite a few additional steps such as medical checks,
police registration, and so on, taking anything from weeks to
months."
To address these inconsistencies, the European Union enacted
a directive in October 2005 aimed at easing the entry process
for scientists coming to Europe from so-called third countries,
non-European countries (the United States, Canada, China, Japan,
Latin America, and so on) that aren't associated with any of the
European Union's Framework Programmes. Instead of dictating exactly
how individual countries should go about this, the directive
mandated that member states should pass national legislation to
implement the new procedures.
"The E.U. is at a disadvantage to the U.S., as we have 25
different countries and systems with different competencies," says
Serpieri. "It is easy for an academic researcher to take a position
in Washington and then move to Atlanta. However, it's much harder
for the same researcher to go from Rome to Lisbon."
The directive creates, for the first time, a residence permit
for foreign researchers that's independent of their contract
status, whether they are employed or self-employed, and with no
quota restrictions. Under the new system, a non-E.U. researcher
wishing to carry out a research project in Europe will sign a
hosting agreement with an accredited public or private European
research organization that attests to the researcher's status as
well as his or her possession of the necessary scientific skills,
financial means, and health insurance.
To avoid any discrimination, the directive also insists that any
international researcher should enjoy the same working conditions
as an E.U. national, including pay and social security. On the
basis of that contract, and provided that the researcher fulfills
standard immigration conditions such as not posing a security
threat and possessing a valid passport, the immigration authorities
of the host country should then rapidly deliver the residence
permit.
Intra-European mobility should also improve as the result of
a recommendation passed at the same time as the directive.
Under the recommendation, researchers could carry out part of their
research activities in other E.U. countries for a period lasting
less than 3 months without requiring additional visas; however,
longer periods might require the signature of another hosting
agreement.
"It's a skeleton for simplifying contracts and procedures
throughout Europe," explains Serpieri. "The mobility issues should
also be hugely simplified as anybody moving within the E.U. has
already been checked by another country."
Realities
The question, of course, for most international researchers is
whether these lofty aims are actually filtering down to the grass
roots of everyday reality. The early indications are promising.
Although only six countries had enacted the required legislation by
the original deadline of October 2007, 15 member states have now
fully implemented the directive, and two more are in the midst of
drafting new laws.
There are some differences in how countries have implemented the
directive. France, for example, had already introduced a similar
scheme for non-E.U. researchers working at accredited public
institutions, so they have simply extended this policy to private
institutions. In Germany, a whole raft of new legislation has
replaced the old system, in which the Foreigners Registration
Authority had to check individual cases to determine whether there
was a need to employ the researcher and whether they held the
required professional qualifications. Now, that onus has shifted to
the hosting institutions themselves, and the government merely
checks whether researchers satisfy the general visa requirements,
speeding the process considerably.
Although it is too early to tell what impact the legislation has
had, German universities have welcomed it. "I'm afraid these new
rules aren't old enough to show any consequences yet," says Monica
Mayer, who deals with international researchers at the University of Bamberg . "But I
think Europe is taking another important step in making itself more
attractive for foreign scientists."
For historical reasons, the United Kingdom and Denmark are
exempt from the directive's mandate. But officials with the British
government acknowledge the need to do more to attract and retain
the best researchers, particularly as a 2006 report found that
nearly 40% of U.K. scientific output over the past 5 years involved
international collaboration, an increase of more than 50% on the
previous 5-year period.
Although it's early days yet and the new rules aren't old enough
to draw any conclusions, "simplified procedures will certainly
improve Europe's image and standing as a more welcoming research
area and friendly environment for researchers outside Europe," says
Shen. "Harmonization would definitely help the mobility of non-E.U.
researchers."
Serpieri says the European Commission will perform a detailed
analysis in late 2008 to see if the rules are having the desired
impact. "The final pieces of the puzzle are slowly coming
together," he says.
|
Science Careers Podcast:
European Visa Issues . (MP3)
|
|
Amarendra Swarup is a science writer in London.
|
Comments, suggestions? Please send your feedback to our editor .
|
|
Photos. Top:
Jon Rawlinson . Middle: courtesy, Pascal Wilmann. Bottom:
Loughborough University Media Service
|
DOI: 10.1126/science.caredit.a0800072
|