The only French organisation for multidisciplinary research, the CNRS is a key player in international research, as well as a recognised innovator. Excellence, freedom of research, interdisciplinarity, and knowledge transfer are just some of the organisation’s values in the service of research that is in touch with economic and social issues.
The CNRS chooses to pursue research excellence that explores natural and social phenomena in greater depth, in an effort to push back the frontiers of knowledge. Based on researchers’ inquisitiveness, this science — which is constantly evolving — is a source of progress for humanity.
“Frontier research”, or so called basic research, is at the heart of the CNRS’s mission. It pushes back the limits of knowledge and expands our understanding of natural and social phenomena. Ranging from atoms, cells, and cognition to Roman law and gender stereotypes, all fields of knowledge come under the scrutiny of the scientific method, which tests theories through experimentation and argumentation.
The CNRS successfully applies for many patents, and establishes scientific partnerships with industrial actors in order to explore possible applications for its discoveries, and to develop technologies. The transfer of its basic research results drives innovation based on a scientific foundation of the highest quality.
Giving young researchers the means to autonomously explore emerging subjects is the goal of the CNRS-Momentum call for proposals launched in 2017. Open to all scientific domains, it finances projects connected to 13 transdisciplinary subjects, such as modelling the living, artificial intelligence, the study of human behaviour, etc.
Open Breadcrumb configuration options
As part of its strategic plan on Artificial Intelligence (AI), the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) has launched its AI for Science and Science for AI (AISSAI) Center. The main objective of this center is to structure and organize transverse actions including all CNRS institutes that interact with AI.
Find out more about ten striking sets of scientific results from the past three years, selected by the CNRS Institutes. Energy storage, the origins of life, the secrets of the atom...These cutting-edge discoveries in basic research most often relate to highly topical issues.
Interdisciplinarity advances science by bringing disciplines together. This encounter can occur between established domains, but also between seemingly remote fields (physics and philosophy, for instance). New concepts, methods, and innovative solutions have resulted from interdisciplinary cooperation, which would not have been possible if scientists had remained confined to their respective domains.
The CNRS has made interdisciplinarity one of the priorities of its scientific policy. Numerous examples have shown that breakthrough discoveries are made at the interface between disciplines, thanks to researchers from different backgrounds. The Mission for Interdisciplinarity (MI) provides tools and dedicated funding to support novel projects led by interdisciplinary communities.
Learn more about MITI (in French)
The “challenge” is a support tool that offers particular incentives. Like an incubator, it can structure research communities within a few years, sometimes from disciplines that are quite remote. The CNRS has positioned itself through this approach as a key player in the national and international debate on future challenges such as mass data, energy transition, or knowledge of the living.
Supercomputing, “cloud,” the use and technology transfer of mass data now concern all scientific disciplines. These subjects, which link the most basic research with the most applied, represent a strategic multidisciplinary challenge for generating new knowledge. In 2015, the CNRS created the Computing-Data Mission (Mi-Ca-Do) to define and implement a global policy jointly shared with its national and international partners.
The CNRS designs and implements Very Large-Scale Research Facilities (TGIR) and Research Infrastructure (IR) with its French, European, and international partners, for the benefit of the entire scientific community. As a result, international teams working at the forefront of research in all fields have access to high-performance facilities: telescopes, high-energy particle accelerators, neutron sources, synchrotron radiation sources, lasers and intense magnetic fields, supercomputing systems, etc.
Within the CNRS Research Office (DGDS), the CNRS Institutes are the structures that implement the institution’s scientific policy, and oversee as well as coordinate the activities of laboratories.
The ten CNRS Institutes cover more or less extensive scientific fields, share projects, and promote cooperation between disciplines. They are directed by specialists in their domains who come from either the CNRS or the universities. The Institutes collaborate closely with functional departments on the following issues:
The INC’s mission is to develop and coordinate research involving the development of new compounds, the understanding of chemical reactivity and prediction of the relations between the structure of molecules at the atomic level and the properties of these molecules.
Research areas
The INEE’s mission is to develop and coordinate research in the fields of ecology and the environment, including biodiversity and human-environment interactions.
Research areas
The INP’s mission is to develop and coordinate research in physics, with two primary objectives: to understand the world and to respond to the challenges facing society today. The INP laboratories are centered around two main fields:
The INSB’s mission is to develop and coordinate research in biology that seeks to understand the complexity of the living, from atoms to biomolecules, and from the cell up to complete organisms and populations.
Research areas
The INSHS’s mission is to develop research on human beings, both as producers of language and knowledge, and as economic, social, and political actors.
Research areas
The mission of the INSIS is to ensure the continuum between basic research, engineering, and technology by promoting a “systems” approach through the development of the disciplines central to the Institute.
Research areas
The INSMI’s mission is to develop and coordinate research in different branches of mathematics, ranging from its basic aspects to its applications. It also helps structure the French mathematical community and integrate it into the international scientific landscape.
Research areas
The INSU’s mission is to create, develop, and coordinate national and international research in astronomy and Earth sciences, as well as ocean, atmospheric, and space sciences.
Research areas
With the dual objective of both conducting and supporting research, the Institute organises and develops projects in computer science and digital technology. One of its primary goals is to make these two research areas a central part of multi- and interdisciplinary issues, along with information science, in particular through its partnership with the INSIS and the CNRS’s interdisciplinary tools.
The IN2P3’s mission is to develop and coordinate research in the field of nuclear physics, particle physics, and astroparticles.
Research areas
The CNRS plays an essential unifying role in the effective functioning and influence of French research by virtue of its partnerships with academia, industry and regional authorities. This partnership-based approach structures the organisation’s science, innovation, and education policy.
Since the creation of associated laboratories in 1966, partnerships and diversity have been the rule for CNRS research structures. The organisation’s 1,100 laboratories have all signed agreements and conventions with partners. In addition, 90% of its laboratories are joint research units (UMR), which bring together personnel from the CNRS and one or more other institutions (university, school, other organisation, etc.) to work on jointly defined subjects. .
Industrial actors are essential partners of the CNRS, working alongside the academic world (higher education and public research). This cooperation, which is sometimes little known to the public, takes the form of joint research projects, patents, domestic and international public-private research organisations, and the creation of start-ups. These are so many concrete realisations that make the CNRS a key player in the French innovation landscape.
The CNRS is an essential contributor to the construction of world-class university sites that coordinate learning, research, and innovation. By promoting synergies and optimising resources, this site-based policy seeks to create champions of academic research in France who can compete with the world’s best multidisciplinary universities.
Present throughout France, the CNRS is well positioned to promote this programme. It is a full-fledged participant in the Investments for the future (PIA) scheme through its role in Idex (Initiatives of excellence) projects and I-sites (Science Innovation Territory Economy Initiatives). A founding member of 14 networks of universities and higher-eductation institutions (ComUEs), it is present in the administrative boards of numerous universities.
With its partners, the CNRS signs site agreements that define a shared scientific strategy, and provide a functional framework for joint research units (resources, contracts, etc.). The organisation helps structure sites by contributing its research excellence, scientific networks, industrial partnerships, international cooperation, and access to large research infrastructure.
The CNRS Research Office (DGDS) coordinates the institution’s site policy through the directors of its ten Institutes.
The Department for the Territorial Organisation of Research (Dapp) is in charge of assisting higher education institutions in their new responsibilities within the French research system. It coordinates the various operations through which the CNRS contributes to the development and promotion of large scientific clusters, working hand-in-hand with local actors and authorities.
The CNRS’s 18 regional offices, each under the responsibility of a regional representative, serve as the primary point of contact for the organisation’s partners in the field. They provide laboratories with essential services in human resources, financial management, partnerships and technology transfer, information systems, hygiene, and security. This cooperation has intensified in recent years in response to a commitment to ensuring coherent management of joint research units in the higher education and research landscape.
CNRS laboratories are the organisation’s “building blocks”. Their teams, which consist of researchers, engineers and technicians, are behind the production and transmission of knowledge. Most laboratories are joint research units, bringing together partners from academia (universities, schools, and other research organisations) and industrial actors.
The CNRS counts approximately 1,100 laboratories spread across France. The vast majority are joint research units (UMR) associated with a university, higher-education institution, or research organisation. They shape the local scientific landscape. In addition to these laboratories, there are 36 international joint units (UMI), whose number has been growing significantly since 2010.
Joint research units, which develop and disseminate knowledge, are characterised by the diversity of their team members’ status and duties. CNRS researchers, engineers and technicians work alongside academics, engineers and technicians from other institutions (universities, engineering schools, other research organisations). Their teams are complemented by contract employees (PhD students, postdoctoral fellows, researchers, engineers and technicians).
Obtaining the UMR status for a laboratory is a mark of recognition in the world of research, both in France and abroad. Reassessed every four years, this label makes it possible to hire CNRS personnel (researchers, engineers, technicians, administrative staff), and gives access to the organisation’s funds and international cooperation tools. 30% of French university laboratories are joint research units in partnership with the CNRS.
More than 15,000 researchers work in all scientific disciplines as represented by the organisation’s ten Institutes. They are recruited either by a competitive entry examination based on a scientific project, or by contract.
Researcher profiles:
Scientists drive research at the CNRS, which they have made the world’s leader in terms of scientific publications. The visibility of their work depends on their participation in conferences and seminars. Researchers also play an essential role in teaching and disseminating knowledge. They assist PhD students and young scientists, and can manage teams as well as teach. Encouraged to transfer their research results (through partnerships with industry, by applying for patents, creating companies, etc.), they are also key actors in relations between science and society through their participation in informational events intended for the general public.
Nearly 18,000 engineers and technicians dedicate themselves to research and related support activities, or are involved in administrative duties (in laboratories, regional offices, or CNRS headquarters). Like researchers, engineers and technicians are recruited through competitive entry examination, or as contract employees.
Film produced by the CNRS. Animation: Nina Demortreux and Nicolas Mifsud. Music: “A Difficult Start” by Julien Vega, edited by Frederic Leibovitz
Training for and through research is one of the missions of the CNRS. Each year, more than 500 young scientists begin a PhD at the CNRS. Recruited through a doctoral contract, PhD candidates are under the supervision of permanent researchers, and are fully integrated in laboratory teams. Approximately 1,700 PhD students of 80 different nationalities are preparing a thesis in a CNRS laboratory.
At the CNRS, the evaluation of public research is crucial, both for its actors, researchers, and for the public authorities that finance it, as well as for society, which has expectations and queries regarding scientific advances and their applications. This is an important issue in the context of international competition, public funding constraints, and societal evolution.
At the CNRS, assessment applies to the entire organisation, including its laboratories, researchers, engineers, and technicians. It relies on several criteria, such as scientific publications, awards, recognition from the scientific community, and technology transfer among others.
In 2016, an international advisory committee evaluated all CNRS activities, following the institution’s completion of a self-evaluation covering both its scientific and research support activities. The advisory committee issued a report proposing analyses and recommendations for the main challenges facing the CNRS between now and 2025, pointing to its budget in particular.
Joint research units are assessed every five years by an independent national governing body, the High Council for Evaluation of Research and Higher Education (Hcéres). Evaluations are completed by committees of experts from academia or the private sector, and their reports are made public.
Researchers are evaluated and their careers monitored by the National Committee for Scientific Research (CoNRS), a collective governing body elected from among members of the scientific community. Each year, researchers present an activity report on the progress of their research, scientific publications, teaching and technology transfer activities.
The assessment of scientific activity and research traditionally relies on the principles of “peer review”. Researchers use qualitative criteria to evaluate one another, for example within the reading committees of scientific journals. These bodies, which are made up of researchers, decide whether the papers that are submitted to them should be published.
As a part of its Open Science policy, the CNRS signed the DORA declaration on July 14, 2018: this is a commitment to avoid the use of bibliometrics and to rely on qualitative assessment, as well as to take into account the full variety of research activities.
In this context, the evaluation of researchers by the sections and interdisciplinary commissions is based on the following four principles:
L’éthique, la déontologie et l’intégrité scientifique sont au cœur des valeurs de l'établissement.
L’éthique nous invite à réfléchir aux valeurs qui motivent nos actes et à leurs conséquences et fait appel à notre sens moral et à celui de notre responsabilité. La déontologie réunit les devoirs et obligations imposés à une profession, une fonction ou une responsabilité. L'intégrité scientifique concerne, quant à elle, la « bonne » conduite des pratiques de recherche.
Au CNRS, ces questions sont confiées au référent déontologue, référent lancement d’alerte, référent intégrité scientifique, à la médiatrice et au comité d’éthique du CNRS.
La fonction de déontologue fait suite à la loi du 20 avril 2016, relative à la déontologie et aux droits et obligations des fonctionnaires, et à son décret d’application en avril 2017. Le référent déontologue est chargé, par la loi, de répondre aux demandes d’avis des agents et de leurs apporter des conseils sur la déontologie, notamment sur l’intégrité, la probité, la neutralité, la laïcité, le secret professionnel, l’indépendance de chercheurs, l’obéissance hiérarchique, le cumul des fonctions ou encore le conflit d’intérêt.
Le déontologue peut être saisi par tout agent pour demander un avis lorsqu’il rencontre une difficulté en rapport à sa situation ou qu’il veut l’anticiper. L’ensemble des autorités du CNRS (directeurs d’unité, directions, présidence) peuvent aussi le solliciter pour toute question d’ordre déontologique. L’avis prononcé par le déontologue donne, en général, lieu à échange avec la personne qui le saisit.
L'activité du déontologue est couverte par le secret professionnel dans le but de protéger l’agent et de garantir l’indépendance du déontologue dans le cadre de l’exercice de sa mission. Le déontologue n’informe personne de ses échanges avec ceux qui le saisissent ; les seules informations transmises sont anonymisées dans son rapport annuel.
La charte déontologique du CNRS
La charte française de déontologie des métiers de la recherche
La fonction est occupée, depuis le 1er septembre 2018, par Joël Moret-Bailly, professeur des universités, juriste.
Contact : joel.moret-bailly@cnrs.fr
La mission du référent lancement d’alerte, organisée par une loi de 2013 et une loi de 2016, est de vérifier la recevabilité et d’organiser le traitement des alertes notamment en cas de commission d’un crime ou d’un délit de violation grave et manifeste des lois et règlements au sein du CNRS. L’utilisation de la procédure interne de lancement d’alertes permet d’assurer la protection du lanceur d’alerte 1) de bonne foi 2) qui lance l’alerte "en interne" afin de régler la situation à l’origine de l’alerte.
Le référent lancement d’alerte reçoit les signalements de tout agent exerçant ses fonctions dans une structure du CNRS, ainsi que tout collaborateur extérieur (prestataire) ou collaborateur occasionnel du CNRS qui relate ou témoigne de bonne foi et de manière désintéressée de faits constitutifs de crimes ou de délits, d'une violation grave et manifeste de la loi ou d'une situation de conflits d’intérêts.
Le signalement, qui ne peut être anonyme, doit être le plus circonstancié possible et accompagné de tous faits, informations ou documents de nature à l’étayer. Dès la réception de la demande, un accusé de réception indiquant un délai prévisionnel de traitement des faits signalés est délivré à l’agent. Les signalements font l’objet d’un premier examen au sein d’un collège coordonné par le référent lanceur d’alerte et composé du référent déontologue, du référent intégrité scientifique, du directeur des ressources humaines (ou son représentant) et de la directrice des affaires juridiques (ou son représentant). Le dispositif mis en place garantit la confidentialité de l’identité des auteurs du signalement, des personnes mises en cause et des informations recueillies par les destinataires du signalement.
Dès lors qu’il suit la procédure légale, le lanceur d’alerte ne peut subir de conséquences péjoratives quant au lancement de son alerte. Le référent lanceur d’alerte garantit la confidentialité de l’identité tant des lanceurs d’alerte que des personnes mises en cause.
La fonction est occupée, depuis le 1er septembre 2018, par Joël Moret-Bailly, professeur des universités, juriste.
Pour signaler une alerte : lancement.alerte@cnrs.fr
L’intégrité scientifique se réfère à l’ensemble des règles et valeurs qui régissent l’activité scientifique et en garantissent le caractère honnête. Elle est indispensable à la crédibilité de la science et à la confiance que lui accorde la société. On désigne, en général les méconduites scientifiques par la trilogie des fraudes FFP (Fabrication de données, Falsification de données, Plagiat), complétée d’une large « zone grise », qui comprend, entre autres, des comportements critiquables relatifs aux publications ou encore des expertises faites en cachant des liens d’intérêt.
Le Référent Intégrité Scientifique (RIS) anime la Mission à l’Intégrité Scientifique du CNRS (MIS), qui intervient d’une part dans le traitement des allégations de méconduites et d’autre part, de façon concertée avec le référent déontologue, dans la formation et la sensibilisation des personnels aux questions d’intégrité scientifique et de déontologie.
La MIS comprend à ce jour, sept personnes :
Les investigations sont régies par les principes suivants : la confidentialité qui s’applique à l’ensemble de la procédure ; la transparence quant aux procédures elles-mêmes ; la protection des personnes impliquées ; la présomption d’innocence concernant la personne visée par une allégation ; l’information rapide des personnes mises en cause ; une attention particulière apportée aux potentiels conflits d’intérêt dans le choix des experts ; l’accompagnement des personnes injustement accusées pour les aider à restaurer leur réputation.
Le RIS est le point d’entrée unique des allégations. Elles peuvent être déposées par toute personne : celle-ci peut alors demander que son identité soit le cas échéant gardée confidentielle (même dans les échanges avec la direction du CNRS). En corollaire de cette garantie, les signalements anonymes sont proscrits.
L’allégation n'est recevable que si le CNRS a été, au moment des faits, l’employeur de la personne (ou d’une des personnes) mise en cause, ou bien de la personne qui s’estime lésée par une méconduite (par exemple en cas de plagiat). Dans certains cas néanmoins, en fonction de l’appréciation qu’il portera sur le préjudice qui pourrait être porté à l’organisme, le RIS pourra demander à être associé, à titre d’observateur, à l’enquête.
Une première étape consiste à qualifier l’allégation et à vérifier si des RIS d'autres universités ou organismes de recherche doivent être associés à l’investigation. Les personnes mises en cause seront rapidement informées et il leur sera demandé de répondre à l’allégation déposée. La MIS débute alors sa phase d'expertise pendant laquelle peuvent intervenir des experts individuels ou une commission d’enquête. Le RIS rédige ensuite un rapport final destiné au PDG du CNRS, qui décidera alors des dispositions à prendre, et en particulier d’une éventuelle suite disciplinaire.
Voir le site de la Mission à l’intégrité scientifique du CNRS (MIS).
Consultez le guide "Pratiquer une recherche intègre et responsable"
Consultez le site de l'Office français de l'intégrité scientifique
Consultez les extraits du bulletin officiel du CNRS liés à l'intégrité
La fonction de référent intégrité scientifique (RIS) a été créée en août 2018 au CNRS. Cette fonction est occupée par Rémy Mosseri, directeur de recherche au CNRS, physicien.
Contact : remy.mosseri@cnrs.fr
Nommée par le Président-directeur général, la médiatrice du CNRS intervient dans la prévention et la gestion des difficultés relationnelles et des conflits interpersonnels dans le cadre du travail, qui, lorsqu’ils perdurent, entrainent de la souffrance ou de la démotivation au niveau individuel et des dysfonctionnements au niveau collectif.
Elle peut être saisie par toute personne, concernée directement ou non par une difficulté relationnelle.
Par des entretiens confidentiels, elle contribue à établir ou rétablir une communication entre les parties prenantes, étape indispensable pour créer les conditions nécessaires à l’installation d’une confiance réciproque en vue de favoriser l’émergence de solutions et l’atteinte d’un accord.
Dans le respect du Code National de Déontologie du Médiateur, elle met en œuvre les principes fondateurs de la médiation que sont l’indépendance, la confidentialité des échanges, l'écoute, l’impartialité, la neutralité, et le caractère volontaire de la démarche.
Sont exclues de son champ d’intervention les situations mettant en jeu l’intégrité scientifique (mission confiée au Référent intégrité scientifique du CNRS, M. Rémy MOSSERI) ou la déontologie (mission confiée au Déontologue du CNRS, M. Joël Moret-Bailly).
Dans le cadre de cette mission, la médiatrice peut être amenée à faire des observations ou des propositions d'amélioration d’organisation ou de fonctionnement. Elle ne dispose cependant d’aucun pouvoir décisionnaire.
Elle adresse chaque année un rapport d'activité anonymisé au Président-directeur général et rend compte également devant le CHSCT du CNRS.
Pascale Beyma a été nommée médiatrice du CNRS le 1er Juin 2021.
Contact : la-mediatrice@cnrs.fr
Créé en 1994, le Comité d’éthique du CNRS (COMETS) est une instance consultative et indépendante dont les avis sont publics. Placé auprès du Conseil d’administration du CNRS, le COMETS traite des questions dont le saisissent le Conseil d’administration, le Conseil scientifique ou le Directeur général du CNRS. Il a en outre la faculté d’autosaisine. Son indépendance lui permet d’aborder librement la portée éthique des grands enjeux impliquant la recherche.
Le COMETS engage des réflexions sur les questions éthiques générales suscitées par la pratique de la recherche et liées :
À l’issue de ces réflexions, il appartient au COMETS, de formuler des recommandations relatives à la définition, à la justification et à l’application de règles relatives à l’éthique et à la déontologie de la recherche. Par ses avis et les actions de formation qu’il mène ou auxquelles il participe, le COMETS attire l’attention des personnels de recherche et de direction sur les dimensions éthiques et sociétales de toute recherche. Ce faisant, il vise à éclairer l’exercice de la liberté de recherche en regard des devoirs et responsabilités que ces personnels ont vis-à-vis du CNRS et plus généralement de la société.
Le COMETS est une instance de réflexion ; ce n’est ni un comité opérationnel d’éthique chargé de donner une accréditation à des projets, ni une instance de déontologie traitant des infractions aux règles d’intégrité scientifique. Il ne statue pas sur des cas particuliers, qu’il s’agisse de projets scientifiques ou d’infractions à la déontologie des chercheurs..
La fiche de présentation du COMETS
Voir le site du Comité d'éthique
Sa présidente est, depuis le 1er octobre 2021, Christine Noiville, juriste, directrice de recherche au CNRS, directrice de l’Institut des sciences juridique et philosophique de la Sorbonne (université Panthéon-Sorbonne, CNRS), présidente du Haut comité pour la transparence et l’information sur la sécurité nucléaire (HCTISN). Contact : comite.ethique@cnrs.fr.
Scientific and Technical Information, which gathers all research-derived information, is a valuable and necessary resource for researchers. A pioneer in the domain, the CNRS offers a complete range of services for higher education and research. At the same time, it is committed to developing open science that is accessible to the largest number of people.
The Scientific and Technical Information Department (DIST) implements the strategy on the production of scientific analyses, publications and data. It oversees the gathering, processing, archiving, and diffusion of documentary resources. It also provides laboratories with thematic and interdisciplinary portals for accessing these resources, as well as scientific monitoring tools. It takes part in the national debate on the transition to the digital age, and promotes knowledge sharing through open archives. The DIST leads a network of IST representatives in joint research units. It also publishes a wealth of material on scientific information news and strategy.
Science is driven by science, and IST services are therefore essential to the activity of researchers, who need to access information on existing research in a particular field, analyse data, publish research results in scientific publications, and find applications for their work.
The CNRS facilitates access to global scientific production through open archives and bibliographical databases. The organisation is the world’s second scientific producer, with more than 50,000 papers published each year (Scopus, Scimago, 2017).
Hal (Hyper articles online)
The objective of the multidisciplinary Hal open archive, which was created by the CNRS, is to share research results. It allows researchers to file research-level papers, whether published or not, in an open access database, as well as dissertations from French and foreign teaching and research institutions, or from public or private laboratories.
Scopus
CNRS researchers have access to the Scopus and Web of Science bibliographical databases, published by Elsevier and Thomson Scientific, respectively. They allow researchers to gain a better understanding of what is being published, and to plan for new collaborations. They are also used for bibliometric analyses, which quantify the publications of researchers.
The potential of digital technology has opened the way for a new knowledge dissemination system. Open science has been a game-changer, promoting greater knowledge sharing for the benefit of researchers and society. This involves giving freer and wider access to public research data and results. This free access is not only free of charge; it also requires more transparency and discussions surrounding scientific work.
The CNRS is deeply committed to this process, and brings together numerous actors around this issue at the national level. It is therefore in keeping with the priorities of the European Union, which seeks to open up and pool knowledge on a large scale.
The “Law for a Digital Republic” of October 7, 2016 is the first legislative text co-written with Internet users. The contribution of the CNRS, which largely inspired the legislators, promoted breakthrough advances for researchers, entitling them to publish, after a shorter embargo period, any articles related to research that is funded mostly by public funds. In addition, the law enables public sector researchers to explore both scientific and non-scientific material without prior authorisation from right-holders, as well as the data associated with such material (Text and Data Mining).
The aim of the Priority Research Programmes and Equipments (PEPRs) is to construct or consolidate French leadership in scientific fields that are linked to a technological, economic, societal, health or environmental transformation and are considered priorities at national or European level.
The PEPRs have total targeted funding of €3bn and exist in two forms - national acceleration strategy and exploratory PEPRs. These programmes are part of the 'directed' part of the France 2030 investment plan known as the 'financing strategic investments' segment. The CNRS is leading most of these PEPRs.
Lors du Sommet du 25 septembre 2015 à New York, 193 pays ont adopté le Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030, articulé autour de 17 objectifs et de 169 cibles visant à mettre fin à toutes les formes de pauvreté et à lutter contre les inégalités dans un contexte de changement global.
Les Objectifs du développement durable visent à transformer nos sociétés pour les rendre plus justes, paisibles et prospères dans le respect de notre planète. Ils nécessitent l’implication de tous et doivent s’appuyer sur les connaissances scientifiques.
La recherche au CNRS couvre toutes les disciplines scientifiques et permet de traiter les enjeux à la fois propres à chacun des objectifs et à l’intersection de plusieurs objectifs : climat-océan-eau-santé ; eau-énergie-alimentation-biodiversité-éducation.
La liberté et la créativité des chercheurs du CNRS leur permettent d’engendrer des découvertes et d’apporter des innovations qui contribuent directement aux Objectifs du développement durable.
La recherche au CNRS, résolument internationale et de plus en plus multi-acteurs, est un vecteur puissant de partenariat à tous les niveaux. Le CNRS contribue fortement aux échanges entre pays et secteurs (académique, économique, financier, politique, associatif...).
Le CNRS s’implique dans des initiatives nationales et internationales pour relever les défis du développement durable : membre de l’Observatoire national sur le changement climatique, de la Fondation pour la recherche sur la biodiversité, il accueille le Global Hub de Future Earth ou encore le pôle européen de Urban Climate Change Research Network. Il se mobilise pour valoriser l’expertise de ses chercheurs dans les panels des Nations unies pour le climat et la biodiversité (GIEC, IPBES).
Cliquer sur les images pour télécharger les fiches
Une Task Force « CNRS Agenda 2030 » est constituée auprès de la direction du CNRS pour traduire en questions scientifiques l’agenda politique, promouvoir les découvertes et valoriser les innovations qui s’inscrivent dans les Objectifs du développement durable. Elle est joignable à l’adresse : agenda2030@cnrs.fr.
Basic research for the benefit of society – this is the ambition for the CNRS of its Chairman and CEO, Antoine Petit. The creation of the Mission for Scientific Expertise (MPES) testifies to the organisation's strong institutional commitment to supporting public decision-making and enhancing understanding of major societal issues.
Carrying out expert reviews of scientific issues is one of the CNRS's missions and the organisation has adopted an institutional scientific expertise charter regarding this. Institutional scientific expertise at the CNRS is collective in nature. Its aim is to share knowledge and provide an independent scientific perspective to support decision-making and public debate.
Carrying out expert reviews of scientific issues is one of the CNRS's missions and the organisation has adopted an institutional scientific expertise charter regarding this. Institutional scientific expertise at the CNRS is collective in nature. Its aim is to share knowledge and provide an independent scientific perspective to support decision-making and public debate.
The term 'collective scientific expertise' refers to all activities aimed at answering a given question by critically assessing the scientific knowledge available. This in turn is intended to support public decision-making and inform public debate on the subject at hand.
Each collective scientific expert review leads to a collective expert report prepared by a group of experts mandated to work on the subject by the CNRS following a rigorous methodology which guarantees the quality of the study.
The collective expert report is accompanied by a synthesis intended for a broad audience and presents the state of the art of available knowledge. It reports on all the points of view expressed in the scientific literature which the study is based on including points for which the current knowledge does not enable conclusions to be drawn or which are the subject of scientific controversy. It may suggest further research on any unresolved scientific issues.
Collective scientific expertise is different from:
The CNRS Institutional Scientific Expertise Charter sets out four fundamental principles that need to be respected to guarantee the quality and credibility of expert reviews:
• Competence - Experts are identified on the basis of their scientific activities and production and their competence to work on the subject of the expert review. The document corpus is constituted and all work organised with methodological rigour.
• Transparency - Publication of the subjects of ongoing expert reviews and of the whole expertise process. At the end of an expert review, lists of the experts who took part and of the bibliographical references they worked on are published.
• Independence - Situations involving a conflict of interest* are prevented by the experts being required to declare any possible interests or links before taking part in the expert review. Preservation from external interventions (those who request expert reviews, the media, etc.) during collective expertise work.
• Impartiality - Plurality of viewpoints and disciplinary approaches in the composition of the groups of experts, the creation of the bibliographic corpus and how the work is reported (knowledge gaps, scientific controversies, etc.).
* In this context, a conflict of interest is considered to be any situation involving interference between a matter of public interest and public or private interests which may influence or seem to influence the independent, impartial and objective nature of the expert review (see article L121-5 of the French 'General Civil Service Code').
The MPES is the prime contact for all questions about the CNRS's scientific expertise work and its completed and ongoing collective scientific expert reviews or even studies being envisaged.
• For individual expertise for the media and think tanks: please contact the CNRS press office.
• To request the assistance of researchers for research, development and prospective activities in private or public sector organisations, please consult the Find an Expert website.
Experts working on an expert review have a duty of confidentially regarding the subject for the whole review period.
Each expert review leads to a collective expert report which is made public. The report is collectively validated by the group of experts presented therein who worked on the expert review. It is accompanied by a synthesis accessible to a broad audience. The CNRS is in no way responsible for any uses that may be made of the collective expert reports or syntheses it publishes.
Expert review coordinated by the CNRS a request from the French ministries in charge of ecological transition, sea, higher education, research and innovation.
Abstract
The significant increase in underwater noise pollution produced by human activities over the past decades and its potential impact on marine fauna is causing serious concern among environmental stakeholders. The effect of noise on the ocean is well known internationally (UNESCO Global Ocean Observing System) and is taken into account in European regulations (EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive). In this context, the development of offshore wind farms is being debated because of the noise pollution they may generate.
This report provides an overview of scientific knowledge on the acoustic impact of offshore wind projects on three groups of marine fauna – marine mammals, fish and invertebrates – with few studies available concerning seabirds and sea turtles. It presents the mechanisms of underwater sound propagation; the multiple impacts on marine species of noise generated by wind projects (especially during their construction, but also during their operational phase), comparing them to other man-made noise emissions; and the effect of mitigation strategies. It also points to the lack of current knowledge, particularly with regard to some species and types of sound source.
Expert review coordinated by the CNRS, in partnership with the Ifremer, the INRA and the Irstea following a request from the French ministries in charge of agriculture and ecological transition respectively and with financial support from the French Agency for Biodiversity.
Abstract
Eutrophication is the most visible manifestation of the pollution of waters by organic matter and nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus) resulting from human activities. It leads to excessive algal growth and oxygen depletion in water which causes major disturbances to aquatic ecosystems. It has an impact on human health and associated activities and is thus a socially sensitive issue.
This report provides a critical appraisal of the international scientific knowledge about the causes, mechanisms, consequences and predictability of eutrophication phenomena. It also aims to provide a clearer definition of eutrophication by taking the land-sea continuum into account. Furthermore, it considers the requirements and operational issues linked to public action to identify levers for action and any scientific obstacles which require new knowledge to be acquired.
Expert review coordinated by the CNRS following a request from the French ministries in charge of children and research respectively.
Abstract
Understanding the issue of incestuous sexual violence against children is hampered by many taboos and prejudices. In the context of the first plan to mobilise people against and combat violence against children (2017-2019), this report provides an appraisal of current knowledge from a gender perspective which favours several analytical perspectives - socio-historical analysis of collective representations, thought about quantification, positive criminal law and closed court cases, neuro-developmental and psychological consequences, psychological support.
It fosters progress in knowledge of the phenomenon both in terms of figures and of an overall understanding of the phenomenon and its consequences in a dynamic perspective of support for public policies. It suggests avenues of thought for research (in the neurosciences, collective behavioural sciences, gender and sexuality studies, legal studies, etc.) and regarding raising awareness, training and care.
Expert review coordinated by the CNRS and the Ifremer following a request from the French ministries in charge of ecology and research respectively.
Abstract
The increase in the worldwide demand for metals has revived the exploration of mineral resources including in the deep ocean which has significant potential reserves of metals. However, the environmental impacts and economic consequences of exploring and exploiting these mineral resources need to be assessed and actually very little is currently known about the ecology of the ecosystems associated with these mineral resources and their links and interactions with more distant sites. Furthermore, the ecological benefits these sites or their uses provide may influence the conditions for their exploitation.
In the framework of the national programme for research and access to deep-sea mineral resources, this report provides an exhaustive critical review of scientific findings about the environmental consequences of the exploration and exploitation of deep-sea mineral resources. It highlights gaps in knowledge, questions and uncertainties and also suggests lines of research for the future. The report is aimed at all stakeholders in the marine sphere and will support the development of public policies regarding applications for mining exploration permits. It will also reinforce France's position in the development of an ambitious marine research and innovation strategy as it takes environmental requirements into account and promotes the sustainable exploitation of the deep seabed.
Expert review coordinated by the CNRS and the INRA at the request of the ministries in charge of agriculture and ecology respectively.
Abstract
Crop weed control is a determining factor for agricultural yields which means selecting the right plant varieties capable of tolerating the application of existing herbicides is important because this provides farmers with a technical response to weed control difficulties. The cultivation of these plant varieties is also presented as enabling farmers to reduce the quantities of herbicides used. Nevertheless, these plant varieties bring up certain questions. What are the medium and long-term effects of their cultivation? What role could they play in policies aimed at reducing the use of pesticides?
This expert review features a multidisciplinary approach combining life sciences and economic and social sciences and thus provides the fullest report possible on knowledge of the impacts of breeding and using herbicide-tolerant varieties. It highlights the specific problems associated with these varieties. One of the research results discussed shows that repeated use of these varieties under certain conditions could make them ineffective in the medium term. This expert review also stresses that weed management should not rely solely on these varietal innovations and should instead integrate different complementary approaches.
Expert review coordinated by the ATHENA alliance which was submitted to the French Research Ministry. Find out more.
Contribution by the 1st Working Group to the sixth report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Find out more.
Photo credit: CNRS Images photo library.
L’utilisation d’animaux dans la recherche demeure une pratique scientifique indispensable, rigoureusement encadrée dans laquelle l’éthique constitue un questionnement quotidien.
Le GIRCOR est une association dédiée à la réflexion et la communication sur l'utilisation des modèles animaux en recherche. Il a été créé en 1992 sous l'impulsion d'Hubert Curien alors ministre de la recherche, et compte aujourd'hui plus de quarante établissements adhérents parmi le public (CNRS, INSERM, INRAE,CEA, Universités...) et le privé (SANOFI, IPSEN, VIRBAC, LEEM, SIMV...).
Le GIRCOR est présidé depuis 2015 par Ivan BALANSARD, Vétérinaire au Bureau Ethique et Modèles Animaux du CNRS. Investi dans le dialogue et la communication envers le grand public, le GIRCOR pilote la charte de transparence sur le recours aux animaux à des fins scientifiques et réglementaires en France.
La condition animale, et notamment l’utilisation d’animaux dans la recherche scientifique, est au cœur des préoccupations contemporaines. Pourtant, les chercheurs se sont imposés, à tort, le silence, laissant les citoyens dans l’ignorance de pratiques scientifiques réglementées, respectueuses de la sensibilité animale et guidées par un réflexion éthique permanente.
Comprendre le vivant
L’utilisation de modèles animaux est essentielle pour décrypter le vivant. Aucune alternative à ce jour ne peut s'y substituer totalement.
Même si les méthodes in vitro (sur cellule) ou in silico (modélisation informatique) jouent un rôle important dans de nombreux projets de recherche, elles ne permettent pas, seules, de comprendre et de reproduire les interactions multiples au sein d’un organisme vivant.
La recherche nécessite tous les modèles (in vivo, in vitro, in silico) pour appréhender la complexité du vivant à des échelles différentes.
Des applications en santé
Etudier les animaux est souvent indispensable pour comprendre l’origine des pathologies humaines et mettre au point de nouvelles thérapies.
« Renoncer à l’utilisation de modèles animaux serait aller vers une médecine aveugle et dangereuse, contrevenant à toutes les règles de bioéthique et du droit international portant sur les essais cliniques chez l’Homme. » Catherine Jessus, directrice de l’INSB de 2013 à janvier 2019.
Les pratiques des chercheurs sont fondées sur une règlementation stricte qui exige un niveau élevé de protection pour les animaux utilisés.
La réglementation en vigueur en France datant de février 2013 établit les différentes règles :
Espèces animales concernées
La réglementation protège les animaux vertébrés, y compris les formes larvaires autonomes ou fœtales évoluées, et les céphalopodes. Cela signifie qu'elle s'applique par exemple aux poissons, aux oiseaux et aux mammifères mais pas aux insectes. L'utilisation de primates est restreinte et l’utilisation de grands singes (comme les chimpanzés) est interdite en Europe.
Origine des animaux
Les animaux doivent provenir d’élevages ou de fournisseurs agréés.
Agrément des établissements
Tout établissement éleveur, fournisseur ou utilisateur doit être agréé par la préfecture. Un vétérinaire est désigné pour chaque établissement. Des inspections régulières sont réalisées.
Evaluation éthique et autorisation des projets de recherche
Tout projet de recherche qui inclut le recours à l'expérimentation animale doit faire l'objet d'une évaluation éthique favorable délivrée par un comité d'éthique agréé. Il doit obtenir une autorisation délivrée par le Ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur, de la Recherche et de l’Innovation.
Douleur
Les expériences potentiellement douloureuses doivent être pratiquées sous analgésie et/ou anesthésie appropriée
Structure de bien-être animal
Chaque établissement bénéficie d’une structure de bien-être animal chargée de suivre l’évolution des projets de recherche.
Cette règlementation veille à ce qu’aucune procédure impliquant des animaux ne soit menée s’il existe une méthode substitutive répondant au même objectif scientifique. La règle des 3 R constitue le socle de la réglementation.
Malgré le développement de méthodes alternatives, l’expérimentation animale en recherche reste indispensable pour étudier toute la complexité du vivant. Mais on ne fait pas n’importe quoi ! Pour obtenir le droit de travailler sur des modèles animaux, il faut aujourd’hui remplir plusieurs critères et respecter un certain nombre de règles qui exigent un niveau de protection élevé pour les animaux utilisés. Une production du CNRS.
Texte : Estelle Rünneburger et Charlotte Pallud
Voix : Douglas Antonio Motion
Design : Loïc Kessler
Sous-titre : Aude Niclas
Depuis 1959, elle constitue le fondement éthique de l’utilisation des animaux à des fins scientifiques.
Remplacer – utiliser d’autres modèles que le modèle animal, quand c’est possible :
– utiliser des modèles animaux moins sensibles (invertébrés comme la mouche drosophile ou le ver C. elegans…)
Réduire – Diminuer le nombre d’animaux utilisés :
Raffiner – Minimiser les contraintes, le stress et la douleur :
