Steering the ship of member states

CERN turns 70 at the end of September. How would you sum up the contribution the laboratory has made to human culture over the past seven decades?

CERN’s experimental and theoretical research laid many of the building blocks of one of the most successful and impactful scientific theories in human history: the Standard Model of particle physics. Its contributions go beyond the best-known discoveries, such as of neutral currents and the seemingly fundamental W, Z and Higgs bosons, which have such far-reaching significance for our universe. I also wish to draw attention to the many dozens of new composite particles at the LHC and the incredibly high-precision agreement between theoretical calculation performed in quantum chromodynamics and the experimental results obtained at the LHC. These amazing discovering were made possible thanks to the many technological innovations made at CERN.

But knowledge creation and accumulation are only half the story. CERN’s human ecosystem is an oasis in which the words “collaboration among peoples for the good of humanity” can be uttered without grandstanding or hypocrisy.

What role does the CERN Council play?

CERN’s member states are each represented by two delegates to the CERN Council. Decisions are made democratically, with equal voting power for each national delegation. According to the convention approved in 1954, and last revised in 1971, Council determines scientific, technical and administrative policy, approves CERN’s programmes of activities, reviews its expenditures and approves the laboratory’s budget. The Director-General and her management team work closely with Council to develop the Organization’s policies, scientific activities and budget. Director-General Fabiola Gianotti and her management team are now collaborating with Council to forge CERN’s future scientific vision.

What’s your vision for CERN’s future?

As CERN Council president, I have a responsibility to be neutral and reflect the collective will of the member states. In early 2022, when I took up the presidency, Council delegates unanimously endorsed my evaluation of their vision: that CERN should continue to offer the world’s best experimental high-energy physics programme using the best technology possible. CERN now needs to successfully complete the High-Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) project and agree on a future flagship project.

I strongly believe the format of the future flagship project needs to crystallise as soon as possible. As put to me recently in a letter from the ECFA early-career researchers panel: “While the HL-LHC constitutes a much-anticipated and necessary advance in the LHC programme, a clear path beyond it for our future in the field must be cemented with as little delay as possible.” It can be daunting for young people to speak out on strategy and the future of the field, given the career insecurities they face. I am very encouraged by their willingness to put out a statement calling for immediate action.

At its March 2024 session, Council agreed to ignite the process of selecting the next flagship project by going ahead with the fourth European Strategy for Particle Physics update. The strategy group are charged, among other things, with recommending what this flagship project should be to Council. As I laid down the gavel concluding the meeting I looked around and sensed genuine excitement in the Chambers – that of a passenger ship leaving port. Each passenger has their own vision for the future. Each is looking forward to seeing what the final destination will look like. Several big pieces had started falling into place, allowing us to turn on the engine.

What are these big pieces?

Acting upon the recommendation of the 2020 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics, CERN in 2021 launched a technical and financial feasibility study for a Future Circular Collider (FCC) operating first as a Higgs, electroweak and top factory, with an eye to succeeding it with a high-energy proton–proton collider. The report will include the physics motivation, technological and geological feasibility, territorial implementation, financial aspects, and the environmental and sustainability challenges that are deeply important to CERN’s member states and the diverse communes of our host countries.

It is also important to add that CERN has also invested, and continues to invest, in R&D for alternatives to FCC such as CLIC and the muon collider. CLIC is a mature design, developed over decades, which has already precipitated numerous impactful societal applications in industry and medicine; and to the best of my knowledge, at present no laboratory has invested as much as CERN in muon-collider R&D.

A mid-term report of FCC’s feasibility study was submitted to subordinate bodies to the CERN management mid-2023, and their resulting reports were presented to CERN’s finance and scientific-policy committees. Council received the outcomes with great appreciation for the work involved during an extraordinary session on 2 February, and looks forward to the completion of the feasibility study in March 2025. Timing the European strategy update to follow hot on its heels and use it as an input was the natural next step.

At the June Council session, we started dealing with the nitty gritty of the process. A secretariat for the European Strategy Group was established under the chairmanship of Karl Jakobs, and committees are being appointed. By January 2026 the Council could have at its disposal a large part of the knowledge needed to chart the future of the CERN vision.

How would you encourage early-career researchers (ECRs) to engage with the strategy process?

ECRs have a central role to play. One of the biggest challenges when attempting to build a major novel research infrastructure such as the proposed FCC – which I sometimes think of as a frontier circular collider – is to maintain high-quality expertise, enthusiasm and optimism for long periods in the face of what seem like insurmountable hurdles. Historically, the physicists who brought a new machine to fruition knew that they would get a chance to work on the data it produced or at least have a claim for credit for their efforts. This is not the case now. Success rests on the enthusiasm of those who are at the beginning of their careers today just as much as senior researchers. I hope ECRs will rise to the challenge and find ways to participate in the coming European Strategy Group-sponsored deliberations and become future leaders of the field. One way to engage is to participate in ECR-only strategy sessions like those held at the yearly FCC weeks. I’d also encourage other countries to join the UK in organising nationwide ECR-only forums for debating the future of the field, such as I initiated in Birmingham in 2022.

What’s the outlook for collaboration and competition between CERN and other regions on the future collider programme?

Over decades, CERN has managed to place itself as the leading example of true international scientific collaboration. For example, by far the largest national contingent of CERN users hails from the US. Estonia has completed the process of joining CERN as a new member state and Brazil has just become the first American associate member state. There is a global agreement among scientists in China, Europe, Japan and the US that the next collider should be an electron–positron Higgs factory, able to study the properties of the Higgs boson with high precision. I hope that – patiently, and step by step – ever more global integration will form.

Do member states receive a strong return on their investment in CERN?

Research suggests that fundamental exploration actively stimulates the economy, and more than pays for itself. Member states and associate member states have steadfastly supported CERN to the tune of CHF 53 billion (unadjusted for inflation) since 1954. They do this because their citizens take pride that their nation stands with fellow member states at the forefront of scientific excellence in the fundamental exploration of our universe. They also do this because they know that scientific excellence stimulates their economies through industrial innovation and the waves of highly skilled engineers, entrepreneurs and scientists who return home trained, inspired and better connected after interacting with CERN.

A bipartisan US report from 2005 called “Rising above the gathering storm” offered particular clarity, in my opinion. It asserted that investments in science and technology benefit the world’s economy, and it noted both the abruptness with which a lead in science and technology can be lost and the difficulty of recovering such a lead. One should not be shy to say that when CERN was established in 1954, it was part of a rather crowded third place in the field of experimental particle physics, with the Soviet Union and the United States at the fore. In 2024, CERN is the leader of the field – and with leadership comes a heavy responsibility to chart a path beneficial to a large community across the whole planet. As CERN Council president, I thank member states for their steadfast support and I applaud them for their economic and scientific foresight over the past seven decades. I hope it will persist long into the 21st century.

Is there a role for private funding for fundamental research?

In Europe, substantial private-sector support for knowledge creation and creativity dates back at least to the Medici. Though it is arguably less emphasised in our times, it plays an important role today in the US, the UK and Israel. Academic freedom is a sine qua non for worthwhile research. Within this limit, I don’t believe there is any serious controversy in Council on this matter. My sense is that Council fully supports the clear division between recognising generosity and keeping full academic and governance freedom.

What challenges has Council faced during your tenure as president?

In February 2022, the Russian Federation, an observer state, invaded Ukraine, which has been an associate member state since 2016. This was a situation with no precedent for Council. The shape of our decisions evolved for well over a year. Council members decided to cover from their own budgets the share of Ukraine’s contribution to CERN. Council also tried to address as much as possible the human issues resulting from the situation. It decided to suspend the observer status in the Council of the Russian Federation and the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research. Council also decided to not extend its International Collaboration Agreements with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation. CERN departments also undertook initiatives to support the Ukrainian scientific community at CERN and in Ukraine.

A second major challenge was to mitigate the financial pressures being experienced around the world, such as inflation and rising costs for energy and materials. A package deal was agreed upon in Council that included significant contributions from the member states, a contribution from the CERN staff, and substantial savings from across CERN’s activities. So far, these measures seem to have addressed the issue.

I thank member states for their steadfast support and I applaud them for their economic and scientific foresight over the past seven decades

While these key challenges were tackled, management worked relentlessly on preparing an exhaustive FCC feasibility study, to ensure that CERN stays on course in developing its scientific and technological vision for the field of experimental high-energy physics.

The supportive reaction of Council to these challenges demonstrated its ability to stay on course during rough seas and strong side winds. This cohesion is very encouraging for me. Time and again, Council faced difficult decisions in recent years. Though convergence seemed difficult at first, thanks to a united will and the help of all Council members, a way forward emerged and decisions were taken. It’s important to bear in mind that no matter which flagship project CERN embarks on, it will be a project of another order of magnitude. Some of the methods that made the LHC such a success can continue to accompany us, some will need to evolve significantly, and some new ones will need to be created.

Has the ideal of Science for Peace been damaged?

Over the years CERN has developed the skills needed to construct bridges. CERN does not have much experience in dismantling bridges. This issue was very much on the mind of Council as it took its decisions.

Do you wish to make some unofficial personal remarks?

Thanks. Yes. I would like to mention several things I feel grateful for.

Nobody owes humanity a concise description of the laws of physics and the basic constituents of matter. I am grateful for being in an era where it seems possible, thanks to a large extent to the experiments performed at CERN. Scientists from innumerable countries, who can’t even form a consensus on the best 1970s rock band, have succeeded time and again to assemble the most sophisticated pieces of equipment, with each part built in a different country. And it works. I stand in awe in front of that.

The ecosystem of CERN, the experimental groups working at CERN and the CERN Council are how I dreamt as a child that the United Nations would work. The challenges facing humanity in the coming centuries are formidable. They require international collaboration among the best minds from all over the planet. CERN shows that this is possible. But it requires hard work to maintain this environment. Over the years serious challenges have presented themselves, and one should not take this situation for granted. We need to be vigilant to keep this precious space – the precious gift of CERN.