The Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) Postdoctoral Fellowships are renowned for promoting research excellence and fostering international collaboration. However, the mobility rule, which mandates that applicants must not have resided or conducted their main activity in the host country for more than 12 months within the 36 months preceding the application deadline, imposes significant and often unnecessary challenges.

While it is true that mobility is a central pillar of MSCA’s mission, it is crucial to recognize that this fellowship is also the primary, and in many cases the only, postdoctoral funding instrument provided by the EU. This makes it essential for MSCA to be inclusive, accommodating researchers at different stages of their careers and personal lives. While encouraging mobility has its merits, overly rigid requirements fail to acknowledge the realities of researchers who have been highly mobile earlier in their careers, those seeking stability, or those facing special circumstances such as family commitments, caregiving responsibilities, or other personal constraints that make relocation impractical. Easing these rules would align better with the goals of inclusivity, sustainability, and fostering high-quality research.

Concerns:

• Exclusion of Researchers with Families and Commitments: This rule disproportionately affects researchers with families, who may find it impossible to uproot their lives to meet the eligibility criteria. Partners often need to sacrifice careers, children are forced to leave their social and educational environments, and the entire family bears the emotional and financial burden of relocation. This condition inadvertently excludes a diverse group of highly qualified candidates and contradicts the MSCA's commitment to inclusivity.
• Mental Health and Productivity Impacts: Relocating to a new country can create immense emotional stress, including feelings of isolation and instability. This stress can negatively impact researchers’ mental health, productivity, and quality of work, ultimately undermining the goals of the program.
• Contradiction to Academic Freedom: Forcing researchers to move to another country limits their ability to make choices aligned with their personal and professional goals. Academic freedom should encompass the autonomy to decide how and where to conduct research.
• Undermining Sustainability Goals: At a time when sustainability and reducing carbon footprints are global priorities, requiring researchers to relocate contradicts these values. Moving families and households often involves significant carbon emissions, including transportation, acquiring new goods, and logistical overhead. The policy is outdated in a world striving for greener practices.
• Overemphasis on Mobility as a Metric of Excellence: The focus on physical relocation as a measure of a researcher’s capability or potential is outdated and superficial. Excellence in research should be judged by the quality of the work, not the ability to relocate. In an era of advanced digital communication, international collaboration is possible without physical presence.
• Ignoring Digital Transformation: The rise of remote work and digital collaboration enables meaningful knowledge exchange without relocation. While in-person meetings can be more effective and preferred, they should be an option, not a requirement. Virtual conferences, joint projects, and online mentorships are cost-effective, sustainable, and inclusive alternatives that respect researchers' diverse circumstances.
   

Recommendations: 

We urge the MSCA to remove the mandatory mobility rule for future calls. Instead of imposing a one-size-fits-all condition, the program can incentivize knowledge exchange and cultural integration through more creative and inclusive measures:

• Flexible Mobility Options: Offer opportunities for researchers to engage in short-term international visits, virtual collaborations, or joint projects. These should be voluntary and designed to enhance, rather than dictate, the research experience.
• Incentives for International Collaboration: Introduce optional incentives for researchers to collaborate with international partners, such as additional funding for short-term stays, workshops, or co-authored publications with researchers from other countries. Support should be available for those who choose to relocate without mandating it.
• Cultural Exchange through Virtual Platforms: Create funding opportunities for virtual exchange programs, including online mentorship, joint research networks, and digital conferences. These approaches allow researchers to build connections without the logistical and personal burdens of relocation.
• Enhanced Research Evaluation Metrics: Shift the focus from relocation history to the quality, impact, and innovation of research proposals. Incorporate criteria that value cross-border collaboration outcomes, regardless of physical mobility.
• Sustainability Grants for Low-Impact Knowledge Exchange: Introduce funding to support low-carbon international collaboration, such as virtual lab exchanges or eco-friendly short-term visits. Align the MSCA with broader EU sustainability goals.
   

A Call for Inclusive and Sustainable Policies

The mobility rule, while well-intentioned, imposes unnecessary burdens on researchers and contradicts the core values of inclusivity, sustainability, and academic freedom. By removing this condition and replacing it with voluntary, flexible, and supportive measures, the MSCA can better achieve its mission of fostering excellence in research while accommodating the diverse realities of modern academic life.

We call on the MSCA decision-makers to adopt these changes for future calls, ensuring the program remains a beacon of opportunity and innovation for researchers worldwide.