Ministers, Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen – Good Morning.

I’m Chris Rapley, Professor of Climate Science at University College London and Chair of the European Science Foundation’s European Space Sciences Committee.

As ESSC Chair, I serve as the ex officio observer on all three ESA science advisory committees (SSAC, HESAC, ACEO), as well as on the US National Academy’s Space Studies Board. I’ve also served as Director of the Science Museum in London, Director of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, based in the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and a decade as Director of the British Antarctic Survey.

During that latter time, I was elected President of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), the international scientific body that advises the Antarctic Treaty parties.

Earlier in my career, I designed and flew satellite instruments to study the cosmos and Sun, and then shifted focus to the Earth, particularly the polar ice—I will return to that experience later.

But let me start by reading the following quote:

“Without scientific progress no amount of achievement in other directions can ensure our health, prosperity, and security as a nation in the modern world.
How do we increase this scientific capital?
First, we must have plenty of men and women trained in science, for upon them depends both the creation of new knowledge and its application to practical purposes.
Second, we must strengthen the centres of basic research, which are principally the colleges, universities, and research institutes.
These institutions provide the environment which is most conducive to the creation of new scientific knowledge and least under pressure for immediate, tangible results.
It is only the colleges, universities, and a few research institutes that devote most of their research efforts to expanding the frontiers of knowledge.
Scientific progress on a broad front results from the free play of free intellects, working on subjects of their own choice, in the manner dictated by their curiosity for exploration of the unknown.
Freedom of inquiry must be preserved.”

These words were written nearly 80 years ago by Vannevar Bush in his 1945 report, Science, the Endless Frontier, which he delivered to President Roosevelt.

Bush had directed the US Wartime Office of Scientific Research and coordinated pivotal projects like the Manhattan Project and advancements in radar. He was tasked by the President to advise on how to transition wartime scientific research into the civilian world. He did so brilliantly by establishing the National Science Foundation (NSF), a model that has since been adopted by research funding agencies around the world.

Key features of the NSF approach are the use of peer review for project selection and assessment, the promotion of university-industry collaboration, support for STEM education, and support for multidisciplinary and large-scale research facilities. The model has enshrined academia as the primary source of new knowledge, fostering scientific innovation.

But, what about space research?

Just a few years after the publication of The Endless Frontier, leading European scientists saw the revolutionary potential of space for advancing our understanding of the Universe and Earth, while also recognizing its practical applications in meteorology, communications, and navigation. This insight, built on developments in rocketry within the US, the UK, and elsewhere, was brought sharply into focus by the USSR’s launch of Sputnik in 1957 and the start of the Space Race.

Visionaries like Sir Harrie Massey in the UK, Pierre Auger in France, and Edoardo Amaldi in Italy, supported by other influential figures such as Dutch astronomers Jan Oort and H. C. van de Hulst, laid the foundation for the establishment of ESRO and ELDO, which eventually led to the formation of ESA in 1975. Harrie Massey was particularly determined that science should remain the cornerstone and driving force of space developments, with universities and research institutes serving as the intellectual engine. This is why ESA, unlike NASA, has never been allowed to establish its own research laboratories.

One of the earliest European academic space research institutes was UCL’s Mullard Space Science Laboratory (MSSL), where I spent the first 25 years of my career. The lab is located in a Victorian country house in the Surrey Hills.

It was – and still is – like many similar institutes around Europe – a vibrant hub of technological development, instrument preparation for rocket flights and satellites, and scientific data analysis. What makes MSSL truly special is the collaborative atmosphere—scientists, engineers, technicians, and students all working together in the same building, with daily interaction allowing for rapid innovation, testing, and iteration of instruments and ideas.

My time there taught me three key lessons:

1. Space, both as a vantage point and as a venue, opens up unique windows on reality.
2. The powerful interplay between science and technology – the combination of science pull and technology push – is key to progress—sometimes incrementally, sometimes in giant leaps.
3. A supportive organisational culture, coupled with a high-risk appetite, is essential for breakthroughs.

As Sir Robert Boyd, the Director of MSSL, used to say: “If you’re not having failures, you’re not at the leading edge. And if you’re not at the leading edge, you shouldn’t be here!”

Achieving success in a small lab is one thing, but doing so on a European scale is another. Imagine for a moment that ESA didn’t exist, and that I proposed to this room the idea of uniting 22 sovereign nations to combine their space interests, organising their academic, industrial, political, and financial assets to design, build, and fly space missions at the absolute frontier of science and technology—all at a fraction of NASA’s budget. You’d likely show me the door. But that’s exactly what ESA does.

And this extraordinary achievement is widely underappreciated within Europe, though it is admired globally – at least by the space cognoscenti, who appreciate what it represents. We need to celebrate it.

Let me illustrate ESA’s track record with a few of its landmark achievements in planetary science and Earth Observation (the subjects of this session), in which European universities have played pivotal roles:

• The Giotto mission in 1986 was the first to fly close to a comet, coming within 600 km of comet Halley’s nucleus, providing ground-breaking insights into cometary structure and composition.
• The Cassini-Huygens mission, jointly with NASA, spent 13 years orbiting Saturn, revealed plumes of water vapour on Enceladus, and landed the European Huygens probe on Titan, where it unveiled methane lakes and river channels reminiscent of early Earth.
• The Rosetta mission was the first to orbit a comet (67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko) and deployed a lander (Philae) onto its surface, providing unprecedented insights into cometary composition and revealing organic molecules that may have played a role in the origins of life on Earth.

I was at the control centre in Darmstadt when Rosetta woke up from two and a half years of deep space hibernation on its outward journey. It was a nail-biting wait – and the entire team, including the ESA DG, erupted into cheers and dancing when the signal suddenly appeared out of the background noise!

In Earth Observation, ESA has pioneered ground-breaking missions like Aeolus, which has revolutionised global wind measurement and significantly improved the accuracy of numerical weather forecasting.

In addition to this, ESA has delivered:

• Millimeter-level measurements of land surface deformation caused by earthquakes using interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) imagery.
• Thirty years of radar altimetry which, along with national missions, have measured the rate of global mean sea level rise with millimeter precision, revealing the long-term trend in global sea level.
• CryoSat-2’s crucial measurements of mass loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, providing key insights into their Earth system impacts.
• Daily high-resolution global air pollution maps from the TROPOMI instrument on Sentinel-5P.

ESA’s Earth Explorer missions have paved the way for the Copernicus and Eumetsat operational programmes, positioning Europe at the forefront of Earth system science to the benefit of academic research and society at large.

Given last week’s devastating flash floods in Europe, and the wildfires in Portugal, the importance of Earth Observation in predicting, monitoring, and responding to extreme events is clear.

Looking to the future, ESA’s three science directorates—mandatory science, human and robotic exploration, and Earth observation—have ambitious plans and scientifically rich programmes extending into the mid-2030s and beyond. In the longer term, the ‘Inspirators’ envisioned in the Matosinhos Manifesto, offer visions of landing a European on Mars, and the robotic return of material from an icy moon of Jupiter or Saturn by 2050.

Achieving these goals will require science funding that is Sufficient, Secure, and Stable.

This is a concern. The ESSC that I Chair has a seat at the table of the ESA Ministerial Council meetings, and in our role as the independent ‘voice’ of the academic research community we are permitted a short Statement. At the Space Summit in Seville last year, I made a strong appeal for increased science funding, outlining the long-term consequences of underinvestment in space science, and pointing out that the current levels of funding are insufficient to achieve the programmes planned.

We supported the Statement with our report: “Uplifting ESA Science Funding,” which summarises the societal value of science in general, and space science in particular. I have a small number of copies here, and can provide more – or a link to the pdf – for anyone who is interested – I recommend it.

We very much hope that at CM25 and beyond, the fundamental value of space science is recognised, and the necessary funds provided.

I’ll close with the following:

The story of European space science began in the post-World War II era, a time when the value of scientific progress was both widely recognised and unquestioned by the public and political leaders alike. The voice of science was strong.

Today, we find ourselves in a very different era—one in which economic concerns, political ideologies, and a worrying decline in rational discourse, marked by sentiments like “We’ve had enough of experts” are becoming increasingly dominant. The voice of science has faded.

Even without the looming threat of the climate and environmental crises, this would be dangerous. As Carl Sagan observed in his book Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark:

“We’ve arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster.”

I agree.

So – here’s the thing: The laws of physics, chemistry, and biology are immutable, and the planet and Universe are indifferent to our wellbeing or fate. Our future lies in our hands, and our actions need to be guided by science – of which space science will play a vital role.

So, I appeal to all here in this room – from the worlds of politics and of academic science – to “Stand Up for Science,” and especially space science, over which you have great influence. The indisputable success of European space science provides a firm foundation.

It is a shining example of what we can achieve when we work together. Let’s spread the word and follow through with action. When you have a great story to tell, use a Megaphone!