Stichting VU
VU
The Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VUA) is a leading research university that ranks among the best in Europe.
ID: 754164625664-44
Lobbying Activity
Meeting with John Berrigan (Director-General Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union) and Euronext and
30 Jan 2024 · IFR-IFD, Europe’s capital markets
Meeting with Diederik Samsom (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans)
24 Feb 2021 · Speech at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam "17th International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability" on the European Green Deal and sustainability
Response to Farm to Fork Strategy
16 Mar 2020
The roadmap of Farm to Fork is part of the concept of safe food systems and is interlinked with other EU strategies related to e.g. the Green Deal, Zero Pollution, energy transition, healthy life, citizen engagement, innovation and knowledge transfer and using digital data and methods. Therefore, we approve this strategy as stated in the roadmap.
The Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam has some recommendations in view of our expertise and activities including coordination of the ongoing action “FitForFood2030” under the EU Horizon2020 R&I programme (W: https://fit4food2030.eu/theproject/) supporting the development and implementation of the Commission’s FOOD 2030 policy framework.
1) As mentioned in the position paper of the AURORA universities network regarding the mission adaptation to climate change (W: https://aurora-network.global/adaptation-to-climate-change-including-societal-transformation/) we emphasize that the strategy needs to:
* explore the potential of renewable energy generation for a “green”, sustainable and better quality of food production and storage to increase food and nutrition security for a better health and improved resilient society. Particular focus points are the inclusiveness of technologies, their impact on economic, ecological and societal development and their acceptance by households.
* reduce pollution of soil, water and air needs to zero which not only depends on “green” and “cleaning” technologies and policies but also behavioural changes at all actor levels. Social sciences and humanities are able to contribute from the initiation phase of R&I and activities to the implementation phases.
2) Transformation of food systems will increase resilience and mitigate their impact on climate change (see e.g. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12154-Europe-s-Beating-Cancer-Plan/F506814). For this we need a) technical innovations including digital ones tailored to local agro-ecological and geographical conditions, b) behavioural changes particularly in consumption patterns, health and lifestyle, and c) further changing mindset amongst e.g. farmers, fishermen, innovators, producers and politicians towards the sustainable food systems (W: http://www.fao.org/3/ca6640en/ca6640en.pdf). The scientific community is ready to play its role in this based on interdisciplinary and intersectoral collaboration.
3) Climate change leads to displacement of populations and scarcity of natural resources, particularly water, giving rise to increasing tensions and conflicts. A question is how resilience to conflict can be built through food and nutrition security policies and programmes. Therefore, the strategy should include policies and actions for empowerment of communities especially of women and enhancing nutrition and water security and governance, food production and marketing.
4) A multi-level approach favours creating a roadmap, which paves the way for efficient political interventions. This requires real engagement of all stakeholders including citizens, consumers, students (from primary to higher education) and educators, apart from scientific experts, entrepreneurs, NGOs and governmental policy makers. The roadmap needs to warrant a) sufficient amount of time to achieve a meaningful, broad engagement for input as well as raising awareness and acceptance, and b) the engagement during all phases of development, implementation, execution and evaluation of the strategy. As a one size fits all approach will not be effective, local or regional approaches to transform food systems need the involvement of local ecological and economical knowledge and experience. This does not seem to be warranted by the consultation chapter (point C in the roadmap).
5) Such changes can only be ensured for the future if young people are involved in this, by dedicated and continuous education and communication on this, changing our own mindset, and giving them the chance to take part in this!
Read full responseResponse to Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan
1 Mar 2020
We welcome the EU Beating Cancer plan emphasizing the holistic, inclusive and patient-centred approach. We underline specific aspects in the chain of prevention to palliation, survivorship and social care.
1. As presented in the AURORA universities network statements on cancer (2019) we stress that the approach entails organizing health and care from a patient’s perspective. Hence patients, survivors and (informal) carers need to be involved via constant dialogue taking into account e.g. diversity, inclusiveness, age, culture and level of health literacy.
2. Reduce risk factors for diseases like cancer:
* implement strategies and policies for climate-neutral, smart and healthy mobility based on cross-disciplinary integrative research (i.e. behavioural, social, spatial economical and technical);
* transform food systems in combination with achieving behavioural change particularly in consumption patterns, health and lifestyle;
* develop renewable energy for a “green” and better quality of food production and storage increasing nutrition security for a better health and reduction of related cancer risks.
3. While the roadmap has a strong focus on prevention and preventive measures, note that:
* the suggestion is that we can prevent 40% of the cancer incidence by changing our lifestyle. This puts the blame on people getting cancer, while lifestyle only increases the risk;
* not all oncological diseases are yet preventable e.g. due to inheritance or random genetic aberrations;
* for current patients prevention is not the solution: we need more integrated and personalised actions towards curing and caring.
4. Share research infrastructures and (digital) health databases, knowledge expertise and experiences to obtain an effective multidisciplinary, intersectoral collaboration for personalised 24/7 healthcare in all member states. This includes investment in development of innovative, adequate and less invasive imaging techniques and specific and sensitive biomarkers combined with clinical and lifestyle data using (adaptive) artificial intelligence based on FAIR data, both structured as well as unstructured.
5. Pan-European clinical research is crucial for beating cancer including rare cancers, needing strong European networks performing RCTs with new designs, thus identifying the best treatment for patients.
6. Ensure standards of care and equal opportunities for jobs, accessibility, availability and affordability of healthcare throughout Europe. In addition, the right care needs to be provided to the right people at the right time and place. We tend to provide expensive therapies to patients for whom it is uncertain that they will benefit from the treatment. Hence, stratification and efficacy monitoring are key.
7. Co-morbidities need to be addressed, treated, and prevented and their incidence reduced. Include current and novel types of psychological support of patients also during treatment and palliative care.
8. Provide coping training for patients, survivors and carers as well as attitudinal training and skilling addressing e.g. stigmatisation by and behavioural change of employers and colleagues.
9. Education of (para-)medical health care providers needs revision due to societal changes, shared decision making, multidisciplinary care approaches and outplacing patients from hospitals to local health care platforms. Shared European medical education goals dealing with such challenges will have a positive impact on sustainable health systems and patient care, and need embedding as a mainstream activity in (para-)medical education in Europe.
Prof.dr. Vinod Subramaniam. Rector Magnificus, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Read full responseResponse to Climate Law
3 Feb 2020
Feedback on the Climate Law proposal - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
We applaud the EU initiative summarised in the ‘The European Green Deal’, which aims to transform Europe in a climate neutral region in 2050. A few aspects need to be noted as well. See our full 1.5 page feedback and references attached.
* The Green Deal and Climate Act are very timely, given the uncontestable evidence that the historical and current use of non-renewable resources has led to climate change, endangering all life on earth unless drastic measures are taken. The 2019 Special Report by the IPCC emphasises this.
* The use of fossil fuels causes more direct and local damage to the environment (e.g. witness the current discussion on NOx). EU-wide measures and regulations have the potential to cause a system change here.
* In the context of geopolitical risks, The Green Deal is congruent with a desire to become more self-reliant in strategic commodities requiring development of new technologies and management processes in many sectors of the economy as well as attitudinal and behavioural changes for acceptation and implementation. As such, the AURORA Universities Network has expressed its position and advice towards strategies for adaptation to and mitigation of climate changes and societal transformation.
* Despite the arguments in favour of the Green Deal, it is clear that public support is not univocal. Those who oppose the plan point at the immense investments that need to be done, and are unwilling to transfer resources to the EU, especially since there seems to be a lack of concrete actions and initiatives that would be funded under the Green Deal. However, the costs of doing nothing are much higher than taking appropriate actions as proposed in the Green Deal.
* A clear dichotomy can be recognised between the generations: an increasingly more vocal younger generation emphasises the urgency to act in view of climate change, blaming older generations for the current bleak outlook for their future. Anchoring the milestones set for 2030 and 2050 in the European Climate Law could be a way to address the young generations’ concerns. Such a legalistic approach has to be complemented by a concrete implementation plan, including a clear vision on how the costs will be shared.
* We strongly recommend to include the guiding principles for sustainable healthy diets as laid out by the Food and Agricultural Organization and the World Health Organization. This improves health and well-being, prevents malnutrition, reduces risks of food-related non-communicable diseases, and preserves biodiversity and planetary health.
Finally, universities and their networks like AURORA Universities Network can play a clear role in implementation plans, cost-sharing schedules, and being sources of empowerment of young people, providing reliable information, counteracting false messages, and providing permanent education and transdisciplinary skilling.
Vinod Subramaniam, rector magnificus, Vrije Universteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Read full response