[Interview] 👨🎓De son bachelor à Sciences Po jusqu’à son doctorat, @jbbonnet.bsky.social revient sur son parcours en science politique, son expérience à Berlin et le rôle déterminant de son mémoire dans son choix de faire une thèse.👇
www.sciencespo.fr/ecole-recher...
@sciencespo-cee.bsky.social
Grand moment de dignité journalistique. C’est un journaliste suisse, malheureusement, ce n’est pas en France qu’on verrait ça.
Je viens de m'inscrire, est-ce trop tard ou peut-on venir dans tous les cas ?
🎉 NEW PUBLICATION🎉
Our paper on "the effect of symbolic policies on climate policy support" has just been published in the APSR ! @apsrjournal.bsky.social (open access)
The end of a long and rewarding journey with the best co-authors @malojan.bsky.social @luissattelmayer.bsky.social
(1/6)
Jens Carstens with his PhD jury
Marcela Alonso Ferreira with her PhD jury
🎓 Congratulations to Dr Jens Carstens (@jenscarstens.bsky.social) and Dr Marcela Alonso Ferreira (@marcelaferreira.bsky.social), who both brilliantly defended their PhD theses in political science yesterday.
All the best for the next stage of their academic journey!
cc @edr-sciencespo.bsky.social
Can the impact of economic crises on political trust be mitigated? @charlotteboucher.fr studies the effect of different measures of social support on trust during the #COVID19 pandemic in Europe. More: buff.ly/htbkwaP
@sciencespo-cee.bsky.social @eurofound.europa.eu @polstudiesassoc.bsky.social
BREAKING: The EU chooses complexity over clarity. Clinging to combustion engines won't make European carmakers great again.
Today’s proposal from the European Commission will extend the sales of cars with engines & divert investment from EVs, while China races further ahead of Europe’s carmakers.
🧵
This Day in Labor History: December 15, 1989. The Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers come to an agreement with the German chemical company BASF for the company’s largest plant, in Geismer, Louisiana, after a five year lockout. Let's talk about the alliance with environmentalists that helped win!
It has become received wisdom in Brussels and Washington that there is a new “euro-sclerosis”: that the EU economy is lagging the US
This view is wrong
A little primer on the measurement of productivity – and why reports of the economic death of Europe are greatly exaggerated🧵
Also, the workers in the original art risked their lives to make the lives of others better. These guys risk our lives to make their lives better.
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.
A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:
a 🧵 1/n
Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Some sources : www.cambridge.org/core/books/d...
www.etui.org/publications...
Certainly, but they were designed to avoid any disruption to the industry, so it was intentional. Emission rules neutralise weight to favour technological improvements over sobriety and "technological neutrality" was a good way to preserve misguided investments in diesel and biofuels.
Great to speak at the @energy-uk.org.uk conference just now, about the tenuous relationship between many media headlines & reality
Here's a taster
#eukconf25
🔴 [COMMUNIQUÉ] L’AFSP déplore la décision du CNRS de retirer sa tutelle au CEPEL
A lire ici : www.afsp.info/communique-7...
#ESR #CNRS #CEPEL #SHS #sciencepolitique #Montpellier
@cnrs.fr @cnrsshs.bsky.social @aefsuprecherche.bsky.social
If you're struggling to have faith in humanity today, here's 2 facts:
☀️ In June solar power generated more electricity globally than nuclear - it's now the world’s 4th largest power source
🔋 Ireland is the latest coal-free country around and there are 15 in Europe.
Progress is slow but possible 💫
[ #VeilleESR #ObscurantismeESR ] Polytechnique demande que les étudiants soumettent par écrit leur discours de fin d'année à l'approbation de l'administration.
Je crois que c'est l'exacte définition de la censure.
Des textes portants sur l'écologie, le féminisme et les inégalités ont été censurés.
📣🧵 HARCÈLEMENT MORAL ET SANTÉ MENTALE EN THÈSE
Parmi les cas que l'on nous signale on en retrouve plusieurs impliquant du harcèlement moral, on en parle aujourd'hui !
#VeilleESR
Affiches : campagne de la @cgtenslyon.bsky.social
⬇️
According to BloombergNEF, 1 in 4 cars sold globally in 2025 is going to be electric - and Chinese EV sales alone are about to surpass *total* car sales in the US.
Hard to shake the feeling that the scale of this shift hasn’t really sunk in for EU policymakers.
Luca de Meo
Carlos Tavares
Bonus : ce qu'on regrettera vraiment de Luca de Meo, c'est quand même son chic vestimentaires (on comprend le départ pour le luxe), à des années-lumières de la plupart des PDG de l'automobile (Carlos Tavares sur la gauche px)
Quand à la production en France 🇫🇷, malgré les effets d'annonce, la hausse des volumes dépendra du succès de l'électrification (et de Meo a passé des mois a critiqué les objectifs 🇪🇺 pour 2025) et de la réalité des commandes auprès des sous-traitants français
En conclusion, de Meo a réussi la premiumisation de Renault grâce à une équipe de direction efficace, notamment avec le débauchage de Gilles Vidal, ex-directeur design de Peugeot
Néanmoins, comme le note @damiendole.bsky.social, la baisse des coûts et des volumes se fait au prix des emplois
Design de la Renault 5
Enfin, le symbole de la "Renaulution", c'est la R5, une voiture qui s'appuie sur la nostalgie de la R5 des années 1980 et sur un design élégant. Or, le publi-documentaire "Anatomie d'un come-back" nous apprend que ce projet était déjà dans les cartons de l'équipe design avant l'arrivée de de Meo !
De Meo a donc bénéficié d'opportunités faciles à son arrivée. D'une part, le CA de Renault avait commencé à mettre de l'ordre dans le chaos laissé par Ghosn. D'autre part, les prix chez Renault était plutôt bas et l'inflation a permis de faire passer des hausses très fortes
A Renault, de Meo a donc appliqué la même recette: voitures néo-rétro (R5, R4, Twingo) & premiumisation avec 44% de hausse de prix chez Dacia sur 2020-2024 et la relance d'Alpine
Bilan : les volumes baissent mais les marges augmentent. Le cours de bourse remonte, les actionnaires sont contents 💸💸💸
De Meo a une très bonne image dans l'industrie automobile. Il était directeur marketing de Fiat au moment du lancement de la 500, puis président du comité exécutif de Seat lors du lancement de la marque Cupra. Deux groupes redressés avec succès, ce qui a sans doute contribué à son choix 📈
De Meo est nommé DG de Renault en 2020, en plein Covid et à la suite de l'arrestation de Carlos Ghosn, un des scandales les plus spectaculaires de l'histoire de l'industrie automobile
La situation est tellement mauvaise que Renault a failli "fusionner" avec FIAT (fusion bloquée par l’État Français)
Dimanche, Renault a annoncé le départ de son DG Luca de Meo (qui rejoint Kering) 💔
Beaucoup de commentaires positifs ont été faits sur son action et l'action Renault a même perdu 10% après l'annonce 📉
Je vous fais un petit bilan perso pour nuancer les hagiographies qu'on a pu voir 🧵
