Brussels remains a hub for lobbying that shapes EU policymaking, and our investigation into ISC Intelligence in Science continues to highlight persistent transparency gaps. On 28 October 2025, we exposed how ISC operates as a key player in science, research, and technology policy, blending policy analysis with strategic advocacy to advance private and elite interests. This 2026 update reviews developments since then, finding no public clarification from the company. Read our original analysis here and our comprehensive report on Belgium’s role
here.
Key Findings Recap
Our 2025 investigation revealed ISC’s deep involvement in EU science policy across the Commission, Council, Parliament, and agencies. The firm monitors policy processes, proposes client-favorable amendments, and runs targeted communication campaigns for journalists and decision-makers. While presenting itself as a neutral promoter of innovation, ISC effectively acts as a gatekeeper, prioritizing select narratives that align with private sector goals over broader public interests. This includes drafting policy inputs and managing media to sideline dissenting views, contributing to regulatory capture in technology and R&D domains.
Transparency and Accountability Concerns
ISC’s activities underscore broader challenges in Brussels’ lobbying ecosystem, where firms with intimate knowledge of EU mechanics can pre-empt and steer agenda-setting, negotiations, and implementation. Science and innovation policies often tilt toward industrial priorities like funding streams and intellectual property protections, at the expense of equitable access, ethics, and sustainability. As Belgium hosts EU institutions, this overlap amplifies risks of unchecked influence, demanding rigorous disclosure of client lists, funding, and policy interventions to safeguard democratic processes.
Absence of Response as Public Interest Issue
No public response or clarification has been issued by ISC since our October 2025 report. In an environment where lobbying directly impacts EU-wide decisions, such silence raises questions about accountability. Stakeholders, including policymakers and citizens, rely on transparency to assess potential conflicts of interest and ensure policies serve the public good rather than hidden agendas.
Ongoing Review and Campaign Context
As part of our 2026 campaign on lobbying transparency, we are monitoring ISC’s activities and EU policy developments closely. Updates will follow if new information emerges or a response is provided.
Enhanced oversight and disclosure remain essential to balance corporate influence with public accountability in Brussels. ISC retains the right to respond, and this article will be updated accordingly.
