Acuerdo 7.2/CG 23-6-17, por el que se conviene la adhesión al Código Europeo de Integridad en la Investigación.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES

I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

Acuerdo 7.2/CG 23-6-17, por el que se conviene la adhesión al Código Europeo de Integridad en

la Investigación.

Acuerdo 7.2/CG 23-6-17, por el que se conviene, por asentimiento, la adhesión al Código Europeo de

Integridad en la Investigación, en los términos del documento anexo.

ANEXO

THE EUROPEAN CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Table of Contents

Preamble

. Principles

. Good Research Practices

. Violations of Research Integrity Annex 1: Key Resources

Annex 1: Key Resources

Annex 2: Revision Process and List of Stakeholders

Annex 3: ALLEA Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics

Preamble.

Research is the quest for knowledge obtained through systematic study and thinking, observation and

experimentation. While diﬀerent disciplines may use diﬀerent approaches, they share the motivation

to increase our understanding of ourselves and the world in which we live. erefore, "e European

Code of Conduct for Research Integrity" applies to research in all scientiﬁc and scholarly ﬁelds.

Research is a common enterprise, carried out in academic, industry and other settings. Research

involves collaboration, direct or indirect, which of en transcends social, political and cultural

boundaries. It is underpinned by freedom to deﬁne research questions and develop theories, gather

empirical material and employ appropriate methods. erefore, research draws on the work of the

community of researchers and ideally develops independently of pressure from commissioning parties

and from ideological, economic or political interests.

A basic responsibility of the research community is to formulate the principles of research, to deﬁne

the criteria for proper research behaviour, to maximise the quality and robustness of research, and to

respond adequately to threats to, or violations of, research integrity. e primary purpose of this Code

of Conduct is to help realise this responsibility and to serve the research community as a framework

for self-regulation. It describes professional, legal and ethical responsibilities, and acknowledges

the importance of the institutional settings in which research is organised. erefore, this Code of

Conduct is relevant and applicable to publicly funded and private research, whilst acknowledging

legitimate constraints in its implementation.



e interpretation of the values and principles that regulate research may be aﬀected by social,

political or technological developments and by changes in the research environment. An eﬀective

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

code of conduct for the research community is, therefore, a living document that is updated regularly

and that allows for local or national diﬀerences in its implementation. Researchers, academies, learned

societies, funding agencies, public and private research performing organisations, publishers and

other relevant bodies each have speciﬁc responsibilities to observe and promote these practices and

the principles that underpin them.

. Principles.

Good research practices are based on fundamental principles of research integrity. ey guide

researchers in their work as well as in their engagement with the practical, ethical and intellectual

challenges inherent in research.

ese principles are:

•

Reliability in ensuring the quality of research, reﬂected in the design, the methodology, the

analysis and the use of resources.

Honesty in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting and communicating research in a

transparent, fair, full and unbiased way.

Respect for colleagues, research participants, society, ecosystems, cultural heritage and the

environment.

Accountability for the research from idea to publication, for its management and organisation,

for training, supervision and mentoring, and for its wider impacts.

. Good Research Practices.

We describe good research practices in the following contexts:

•

Research Environment

Training, Supervision and Mentoring

Research Procedures

Safeguards

Data Practices and Management

Collaborative Working

Publication and Dissemination

Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing

.1 Research Environment.

•

Research institutions and organisations promote awareness and ensure a prevailing culture of

research integrity.

Research institutions and organisations demonstrate leadership in providing clear policies and

procedures on good research practice and the transparent and proper handling of violations.

Research institutions and organisations support proper infrastructure for the management and

protectionofdataandresearchmaterialsinalltheirforms(encompassingqualitativeandquantitative

data, protocols, processes, other research artefacts and associated metadata) that are necessary

for reproducibility, traceability and accountability.

•

Research institutions and organisations reward open and reproducible practices in hiring and

promotion of researchers.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

.2. Training, Supervision and Mentoring.

•

Research institutions and organisations ensure that researchers receive rigorous training in

research design, methodology and analysis.

•

Research institutions and organisations develop appropriate and adequate training in ethics

and research integrity and ensure that all concerned are made aware of the relevant codes and

regulations.

•

Researchers across the entire career path, from junior to the most senior level, undertake training

in ethics and research integrity.

Senior researchers, research leaders and supervisors mentor their team members and oﬀer

speciﬁc guidance and training to properly develop, design and structure their research activity

and to foster a culture of research integrity.

.3. Research Procedures.

•

Researchers take into account thestate-of- the-art in developing research ideas.

•

Researchers design, carry out, analyse and document research in a careful and well- considered

manner.

•

Researchers make proper and conscientious use of research funds.

Researchers publish results and interpretations of research in an open, honest, transparent and

accurate manner, and respect conﬁdentiality of data or ﬁndings when legitimately required to

do so.

•

Researchers report their results in a way that is compatible with the standards of the discipline

and, where applicable, can be veriﬁed and reproduced.

.4. Safeguards.

•

Researchers comply with codes and regulations relevant to their discipline.

•

Researchers handle research subjects, be they human, animal, cultural, biological, environmental

or physical, with respect and care, and in accordance with legal and ethical provisions.

•

Researchers have due regard for the health, safety and welfare of the community, of collaborators

and others connected with their research.

Research protocols take account of, and are sensitive to, relevant diﬀerences in age, gender,

culture, religion, ethnic origin and social class.

Researchers recognise and manage potential harms and risks relating to their research.

.5. Data Practices and Management.

•

Researchers, researchinstitutionsandorganisationsensureappropriatestewardshipandcuration

of all data and research materials, including unpublished ones, with secure preservation for a

reasonable period.

•

Researchers, research institutions and organisations ensure access to data is as open as possible,

as closed as necessary, and where appropriate in line with the FAIR Principles (Findable,

Accessible, Interoperable and Re-usable) for data management.

•

Researchers, research institutions and organisations provide transparency about how to access

or make use of their data and research materials.

Researchers, research institutions and organisationsacknowledgedataaslegitimate and citable

products of research.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

•

Researchers, research institutions and organisations ensure that any contracts or agreements

relating to research outputs include equitable and fair provision for the management of their

use, ownership, and/or their protection under intellectual property rights.

.6. Collaborative Working.

•

All partners in research collaborations take responsibility for the integrity of the research.

•

All partners in research collaborations agreeattheoutset onthegoalsof heresearch and on the

process for communicating their research as transparently and openly as possible.

•

All partners formally agree at the start of their collaboration on expectations and standards

concerning research integrity, on the laws and regulations that will apply, on protection of the

intellectual property of collaborators, and on procedures for handling conﬂicts and possible

cases of misconduct.

All partners in research collaborations are properly informed and consulted about submissions

for publication of the research results.

.7. Publication and Dissemination.

•

All authors are fully responsible for the content of a publication, unless otherwise speciﬁed.

•

All authors agree on the sequence of authorship, acknowledging that authorship itself is based on

a signiﬁcant contribution to the design of the research, relevant data collection, or the analysis

or interpretation of the results.

•

Authors ensure that their work is made available to colleagues in a timely, open, transparent, and

accurate manner, unless otherwise agreed, and are honest in their communication to the general

public and in traditional and social media.

Authors acknowledge important work and intellectual contributions of others, including

collaborators, assistants, and funders, who have inﬂuenced the reported research in appropriate

form, and cite related work correctly.

•

All authors disclose any conﬂicts of interest and ﬁnancial or other types of support for the

research or for the publication of its results.

Authorsandpublishers issue corrections or retract work if necessary, the processes for which are

clear, the reasons are stated, and authors are given credit for issuing prompt corrections post

publication.

•

Authors and publishers consider negative results to be as valid as positive ﬁndings for publication

and dissemination.

Researchers adhere to the same criteria as those detailed above whether they publish in a

subscription journal, an open access journal or in any other alternative publication form.

.8. Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing.

•

Researchers take seriously their commitment to the research community by participating in

refereeing, reviewing and evaluation.

Researchers review and evaluate submissions for publication, funding, appointment, promotion

or reward in a transparent and justiﬁable manner.

Reviewers or editors with a conﬂict of interest withdraw from involvement in decisions on

publication, funding, appointment, promotion or reward.

Reviewers maintain conﬁdentiality unless there is prior approval for disclosure.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

•

Reviewers and editors respect the rights of authors and applicants, and seek permission to make

use of the ideas, data or interpretations presented.

. Violations of Research Integrity.

It is of crucial importance that researchers master the knowledge, methodologies and ethical practices

associatedwiththeirﬁeld. Failingtofollowgoodresearchpracticesviolatesprofessionalresponsibilities.

It damages the research processes, degrades relationships amongresearchers, undermines trust in

andthe credibility ofresearch, wastes resources andmay expose research subjects, users, society or the

environment to unnecessary harm.

.1. Research Misconduct and other Unacceptable Practices.

Research misconduct is traditionally deﬁned as fabrication, falsiﬁcation, or plagiarism (the so-called

FFP categorisation) in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results:

•

Fabrication is making up results and recording them as if they were real.

Falsiﬁcation is manipulating research materials, equipment or processes or changing, omitting

or suppressing data or results without justiﬁcation.

•

Plagiarism is using other people’s work and ideas without giving proper credit to the original

source, thusviolating therights of the original author(s) to their intellectual outputs.



ese three forms of violation are considered particularly serious since they distort the research record.

ere are further violations of goodresearch practice thatdamagethe integrity of the research process



or of researchers. In addition to direct violations of hegoodresearch practices set out in this Code of

Conduct, examples of other unacceptable practices include, but are not conﬁned to:

•

Manipulating authorship or denigrating the role of other researchers in publications.

Re-publishing substantive parts of one’s own earlier publications, including translations, without

duly acknowledging or citing the original (‘self-plagiarism’).

•

Citing selectively to enhance own ﬁndings or to please editors, reviewers or colleagues.

Withholding research results.

Allowing funders/sponsors to jeopardise independence in the research process or reporting of

results so as to introduce or promulgate bias.

•

Expanding unnecessarily the bibliography of a study.

Accusing a researcher of misconduct or other violations in a malicious way.

Misrepresenting research achievements.

Exaggerating the importance and practical applicability of ﬁndings.

Delaying or inappropriately hampering the work of other researchers.

Misusing seniority to encourage violations of research integrity.

Ignoring putative violations of research integrity by others or covering up inappropriate

responses to misconduct or other violations by institutions.

•

Establishing or supporting journals that undermine the quality control of research (‘predatory

journals’).

In their most serious forms, unacceptable practices are sanctionable, but at the very least

everyeﬀortmustbemadetoprevent,discourage and stop them through training, supervision

andmentoring andthrough the development of apositive andsupportiveresearch environment.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

.2. Dealing with Violations and Allegations of Misconduct.

National or institutional guidelines diﬀer as to how violations of good research practice or allegations

of misconduct are handled in diﬀerent countries. However, it always is in the interest of society and the

research community that violations are handled in a consistent and transparent fashion. e following

principles need to be incorporated into any investigation process.

Integrity.

•

Investigations are fair, comprehensive and conducted expediently, without compromising

accuracy, objectivity or thoroughness.

•

e parties involved in the procedure declare any conﬂict of interest that may arise during the

investigation.

•

Measures are taken to ensure that investigations are carried through to a conclusion.

Procedures are conducted conﬁdentially in order to protect those involved in the investigation.

Institutions protect the rights of ‘whistle- blowers’ during investigations and ensure that their

career prospects are not endangered.

•

General procedures for dealing with violations of good research practice are publicly available

and accessible to ensure their transparency and uniformity.

Fairness.

•

Investigations are carried out with due process and in fairness to all parties.

•

Persons accused of research misconduct are given full details of the allegation(s) and allowed a

fair process for responding to allegations and presenting evidence.

•

Action is taken against persons for whom an allegation of misconduct is upheld, which is

proportionate to the severity of the violation.

Appropriate restorative action is taken when researchers are exonerated of an allegation of

misconduct.

Anyone accused of research misconduct is presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

Annex 1: Key Resources.

All European Academies (2013). "Ethics Education in Science". Statement by the Permanent

Working Group on Science and Ethics. www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Statement_

Ethics_Edu_web_ﬁnal_2013_10_10.pdf [Accessed 15/01/2017]

AllTrials: Trials Registration and Reporting Platform. http://www.alltrials.net/ﬁnd -out-more/

[

Accessed 14/03/2017]

American Association for the Advancement of Science (2017). e Brussels Declaration:

Ethics and Principles for Science & Society Policy-Making. http://www.sci-com.eu/main/docs/

Brussels-Declaration.pdf?58b6e4b4 [Accessed 14/03/2017]

Committee on Publication Ethics COPE. Guidelines. http://publicationethics.org/resources/

guidelines [Accessed 15/01/2017]

Data Citation Synthesis Group, Martone M. (ed.) (2014). Joint Declaration of Data Citation

Principles. San Diego, CA: FORCE11. https://www.force11.org/group/joint-declaration-data-

citation-principles-ﬁnal [Accessed 15/01/2017]

EQUATOR Network: Reporting Guidelines to enhance the quality and transparency of health

research. https://www.equator-network.org/ [Accessed 13/03/2017]

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

EURODAT. Collaborative Data Infrastructure: Guidelines on data management. https://eudat.

eu/data-management [Accessed 15/01/2017]

InterAcademy Partnership (2016). "Doing Global Science: A Guide to Responsible Conduct

in the Global Research Enterprise". Princeton University Press. http://interacademycouncil.

net/24026/29429.aspx [Accessed 15/01/2017]

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Deﬁning the Role of Authors and

Contributors.

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/

deﬁning- the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html [Accessed 15/01/2017]

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Global Science Forum

(

2007). Best Practices for Ensuring Scientiﬁc Integrity and Preventing Misconduct. https://www.

oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/40188303.pdf [Accessed 15/01/2017]

Research Data Alliance RDA (2016). RDA/WDS Publishing Data Workﬂows WG

Recommendations. http://dx.doi.org/10.15497/RDA00004 [Accessed 15/01/2017]

Research Data Alliance RDA (2016). Data Description Registry Interoperability WG

Recommendations. http://dx.doi.org/10.15497/RDA00003 [Accessed 15/01/2017]

UK Academy of Medical Sciences (2015). Perspective on ‘Conﬂict of Interest ’. https://acmedsci.

ac.uk/ﬁle-download/41514-572ca1ddd6cca.pdf [Accessed 13/03/2017]

Wilkinson MD et al. (2016). e FAIR Guiding Principles for scientiﬁc data management

and stewardship, Scientiﬁc Data 3:160018 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18 http://www.nature.com/

articles/sdata201618 [Accessed 15/01/2017]

World Conference on Research Integrity WCRI (2013). Montreal Statement on Research

Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations. http://www.researchintegrity.org/

Statements/Montreal%20Statement%20English.pdf [Accessed 05/01/2017]

World Conference on Research Integrity WCRI (2010). Singapore Statement on Research

Integrity. www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html [Accessed 15/01/2017]

Annex 2: Revision Process and List of Stakeholders.

Revision Process.



is document is based on "e European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity" developed in

011 by All European Academies (ALLEA) and the European Science Foundation (ESF). It is a living

document that will be reviewed every three to ﬁve years and revised as necessary to take account of

evolving concerns, so that it can continue to serve the research community as a framework for good

research practice.



e current revision is motivated by developments in, among others: the European research funding

and regulatory landscapes; institutional responsibilities; scientiﬁc communication; review procedures;

open access publishing; the use of repositories; and the use of social media and citizen involvement

in research. Initiated by the ALLEA Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics, the revision

included extensive consultation among major stakeholders in European research, both public and

private, to ensure a sense of shared ownership.

List of stakeholders.

Multilateral stakeholders organisations that provided written feedback* and/or participated at the

stakeholder consultation meeting in Brussels in November 2016 :

•

BusinessEurope*⁺

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

•

Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)*

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)*⁺

Conference on European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research

(

CESAER)*⁺

•

DIGITALEUROPE*

EU-LIFE*⁺

European Association of the Molecular and Chemical Sciences (EUCHEMS)*

European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO)*⁺

European Citizen Science Association (ECSA)*

European Commission*⁺

European Group on Ethics in Science and Technologies (EGE)*

European Network of Research Integrity Oﬃces (ENRIO)*

European University Association (EUA)*

Euroscience*

FoodDrinkEurope*⁺

Global Young Academy (GYA)*

League of European Research Universities (LERU)*⁺

Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe (OpenAIRE)*

Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)⁺

Sense about Science*

Science Europe*⁺

Young European Associated Researchers (YEAR)*

Young European Research Universities Network (YERUN)*⁺

Annex 3: ALLEA Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics.

eALLEAPermanentWorkingGrouponScienceandEthics(PWGSE)isconcernedwithawiderange



of issues, both ‘internal’ (within the scientiﬁc community) and ‘external’ (relations between science

and society). Since ethical considerations have been an essential component in the consolidation of

a united Europe, and also in the creation of ALLEA, the PWGSE was established to bring together

experts from academies across Europe and provide them with a platform for continuous debate on

research ethics and research integrity.



e PWGSE has been extending its capacities and activities during recent years, in order to adequately

fulﬁl its mission of collective deliberation on topics such as research integrity, ethics education in

science and research training, ethics of scientiﬁc policy advice, trust in science, scientiﬁc misconduct,

and plagiarism, among others.

Further issues recently addressed include dual use of research outcomes, ethical aspects of risks,

science and human rights, support for higher education and research in Palestine, research on human

embryos, synthetic biology, nanotechnologies etc. Additionally, the group provides expertise for the

Horizon 2020 funded ENERI project (European Network of Research Ethics and Research Integrity),

which aims to train experts in ethics related issues and to harmonise research integrity infrastructures

across Europe.

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno



e PWGSE meets regularly and has also convened thematic meetings in wider settings, typically

in partnerships with other relevant organisations such as the European Commission, the European

Science Foundation (ESF), the International Council for Science (ICSU), and UNESCO, among many

others. e members of the PWGSE drew on its extensive network of experts and institutions for the

successful execution of the revision process of "e European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity".

Members of the ALLEA Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics.

Göran Hermerén (Chair) – Royal Swedish Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities

Maura Hiney – Royal Irish Academy, Chair of Draf ing Group

László Fésüs – Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Draf ing Group

Roger Pﬁster – Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences, Draf ing Group

Els Van Damme – Royal Academy of Sciences, Letters and Arts of Belgium, Draf ing Group

Martin van Hees – Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Draf ing Group

Krista Varantola – Council of Finnish Academies, Draf ing Group

Anna Benaki – Academy of Athens (Greece)

Anne Fagot-Largeault – Académie des Sciences (France)

Ludger Honnefelder – Union of the German Academies of Sciences and Humanities

Bertil Emrah Oder – Bilim Akademisi (e Science Academy, Turkey)

Martyn Pickersgill – Royal Society of Edinburgh (United Kingdom)

Pere Puigdomenech – Royal Academy of Sciences and Arts of Barcelona / Institute for Catalan

Studies (Spain)

Kirsti Strøm Bull – Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters

Zbigniew Szawarski – Polish Academy of Sciences

Raivo Uibo – Estonian Academy of Sciences

Support to PWGSE and Draf ing Group: Robert Vogt (ALLEA secretariat)

ALLEA, the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities, was founded in 1994 and

currently brings together 59 Academies in more than 40 countries from the Council of Europe region.

Member Academies operate as learned societies, think tanks and research performing organisations.



ey are self-governing communities of leaders of scholarly enquiry across all ﬁelds of the natural

sciences, the social sciences and the humanities. ALLEA there fore provides access to an unparalleled

human resource of intellectual excellence, experience and expertise.

Independent from political, commercial and ideological interests, ALLEA’s policy work seeks to

contribute to improving the framework conditions under which science and scholarship can excel.

Jointly with its Member Academies, ALLEA is in a position to address the full range of structural and

policy issues facing Europe in science, research and innovation. In doing so, it is guided by acommon

understanding of Europe bound together by historical, social and political factors as well as for

scientiﬁc and economic reasons.

www.allea.org

Member Academies.

Albania: Akademia E Shkencave E Shqipërisë; Armenia: գիտꢀթյꢀնների ազգային ակադեꢁա;

Austria: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaf en; Belarus: Нацыянальная акадэмiя навук

Беларусі; Belgium: Academie Royale des Sciences des Lettres et des Beaux- Arts de Belgique;

Núm. 4/2017, de 24 de julio

I. DISPOSICIONES Y ACUERDOS GENERALES I.2. Consejo de Gobierno

Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van Belgie voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten; Koninklijke Academie

voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde; Academie Royale de langue et de literature francaises de

Belgique; Bosnia and Herzegovina: Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine; Bulgaria:

Българска академия на науките; Croatia: Hrvatska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti; Czech

Republic: Akademie věd České republiky; Učená společnost České republiky; Denmark: Kongelige

Danske Videnskabernes Selskab; Estonia: Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia; Finland: Tiedeakatemiain

neuvottelukunta;France:AcadémiedesSciences-InstitutdeFrance;AcadémiedesInscriptionsetBelles-

Lettres; Georgia: საქართველოს მეცნიერებათა ეროვნული აკადემია; Germany: Leopoldina

Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaf en; Union der deutschen Akademien der Wissenschaf en;

Akademie der Wissenschaf en in Göttingen, Akademie der Wissenschaf en und der Literatur Mainz,

Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaf en, Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaf en,

Akademie der Wissenschaf en in Hamburg, Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaf en, Nordrhein-

Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaf en und der Künste, Sächsische Akademie der Wissenschaf en

zu Leipzig (Associate Members); Greece: Ακαδημία Αθηνών; Hungary: Magyar Tudományos

Akadémia; Ireland: e Royal Irish Academy - Acadamh Ríoga na hÉireann; Israel:

האקדמיה

הלאומית

הישראלית

למדעים;

Italy: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei; Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti;

Accademia delle Scienze di Torino; Kosovo: Akademia e Shkencave dhe e Arteve e Kosovës; Latvia:

Latvijas Zinātņu akadēmija; Lithuania: Lietuvos mokslų akademijos; Macedonia: Македонска

Академија на Науките и Уметностите; Moldova: Academia de Ştiinţe a Moldovei; Montenegro:

Crnogorska akademija nauka i umjetnosti; Netherlands: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van

Wetenschappen; Norway: Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi; Det Kongelige Norske Videnskabers

Selskab Poland: Polska Akademia Umiejętności; Polska Akademia Nauk; Portugal: Academia das

Ciências de Lisboa; Romania: Academia Română; Russia: Российская академия наук (Associate

Member); Serbia: Srpska Akademija Nauka i Umetnosti; Slovakia: Slovenská Akadémia Vied;

Slovenia: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti; Spain: Real Academia de Ciencias Morales y

Políticas; Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales (Associate Member); Reial Acadèmia

de Ciències i Arts de Barcelona; Institut d’Estudis Catalans; Sweden: Kungl. Vetenskapsakademien;

Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien; Switzerland: Akademien der Wissenschaf en

Schweiz; Turkey: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi; Bilim Akademisi (Associate Member); Ukraine:

Національна академія наук України; United Kingdom: e British Academy; e Learned Society

of Wales; e Royal Society; e Royal Society of Edinburgh