Session 7: Ensuring Scientific Independence: Key Insights from IANPHI Session
On April 19, 2024, IANPHI held a session during the IANPHI Europe Regional Network meeting during which experts and stakeholders delved into the critical issue of maintaining scientific independence within National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs). The discussion yielded valuable insights and recommendations essential for safeguarding the integrity of public health research and decision-making processes. Facilitated by Dr. Bjørn G. Iversen, Senior Medical Officer at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (FHI), the session delved into the intricate balance of maintaining scientific independence within the governmental structure of National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs). With an introduction by Dr. Iversen, the discussion highlighted the inherent challenges faced by NPHIs in upholding scientific integrity while also supporting policy formulation and decision-making processes.
Group Work
Facilitated by Mag. Claudia Habl, Director, International Affairs & Subsidiaries, Austrian National Public Health Institute (GÖG), Dr. Anders Tegnell, Senior Expert, Public Health Agency, Sweden, Ms. Annika Veimer, Director, National Institute for Health Development, Estonia and Dr. Fernando de Almeida, Chairman of the Executive Board, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Portugal
Through interactive group discussions, attendees explored the dilemmas and practical challenges inherent in the relationship between NPHIs and governmental bodies, particularly Ministries of Health. Drawing from diverse experiences, the session aimed to identify potential solutions and best practices for navigating political and economic pressures while safeguarding scientific independence.
Key Takeaways:
- Building Trust through Dialogue: Participants emphasized the need for continuous dialogue between NPHIs and policymakers to establish trust and ensure that scientific recommendations are not compromised during crises. This ongoing communication fosters mutual understanding and supports evidence-based decision-making.
- Financial Autonomy: Adequate funding that allows NPHIs to pursue their own initiatives independently of government directives emerged as a cornerstone for preserving scientific autonomy. Financial stability enables NPHIs to undertake crucial research and initiatives without undue influence.
- Transparency and Accountability: Maintaining transparency and accountability in funding allocation and decision-making processes is paramount. Clear guidelines and protocols for research funding decisions ensure transparency and prevent undue influence from external stakeholders.
- Education and Advocacy: Educating policymakers and advocating for legislative measures that protect scientific independence are essential. Participants underscored the importance of raising awareness about the risks of political interference in research funding and the need for robust legislative and policy safeguards.
- Managing Conflicts of Interest: Addressing conflicts of interest, particularly in public-private partnerships and collaborations with advocacy groups, requires clear rules and transparent processes. Managing potential conflicts ensures that NPHIs maintain impartiality and uphold scientific integrity.
- Legal Framework and Governance: Establishing legal regulations or rules to shield expert advice from political influence is crucial. Examples from countries with robust governance structures demonstrate the effectiveness of clear legal frameworks in preserving scientific autonomy.
- Appointment Systems: Avoiding political appointees in NPHI leadership roles is essential for maintaining independence. Innovative appointment systems underscore the importance of merit-based selection processes in ensuring leadership integrity.
- Prioritizing Collaboration: Prioritizing collaborations based on shared standards and values, while being selective in choosing battles, is key. International collaborations should align with NPHIs' principles and standards to mitigate political considerations.
- Visual Unity and Distinction: Maintaining a unified visual appearance during public announcements and press conferences reinforces the unity of decision-making while ensuring clarity regarding the distinction between scientific advice and political decisions.
Finally, Dr. Iversen informed participants of the on-going work to finalize the Code of Practice as part of a sub-group of the IANPHI Thematic Committee on Essential Public Health Functions. Plans are underway to finalize the draft Code of Practice document for NPHIs, incorporating the recommendations discussed during the session and with input from Institutes from regions outside of Europe. This comprehensive framework will be presented to the General Assembly for approval, ensuring alignment with global standards for scientific integrity.
In conclusion, the session underscored the complex dynamics involved in preserving scientific independence within NPHIs and provided actionable recommendations for addressing challenges and upholding the integrity of public health research and decision-making.