Cinzia reflected that the inspiring motto of the EFPSA Conference, “Breaking walls, Building Bridges,” evokes common aims of Community Psychology (contrasting marginalisation, promoting inclusion and community development). It also evokes one of its methodological footprint, a linking science, in the twofold sense of connecting people, including those at the margins, and different sources of knowledge (disciplines, communities, organisations). A linking science, fostering dialogue and collaboration that has, however, its distinctive features:

• A value-driven approach: engaging with humanity’s problems with creativity, attention to context, respect for diversity, and a quest for social justice.
• A situated multilevel ecological approach:  using methods that pay strong attention to the qualities of contexts both in objective and subjective terms and on how people’s experience is situated in contexts.
• An approach that is integrating more and more critical epistemologies.
• An approach that emphasises the individual and collective strengths and capacities and think of them as transformative drivers of change. 

The Students of Psychology that we met at the conference, coming from all over Europe, clearly expressed a willingness to be drivers of change and act upon issues like gender equality, access to education, migrations, stigmatisation. With its approach and methodologies, they found that Community Psychology could contribute significantly and asked for comprehensive systematic integration of Community Psychology in the academic curriculum of all psychologists. 

For Francisco, the pandemic challenge has given an unprecedented visibility to the profession and allowed psychology to reach further. Psychologists reinvented themselves and invested in new working patterns, such as computer-mediated intervention. The community has had access to new information solutions (e.g. www.eusinto.me) and psychological support (e.g. SNS24 Psychological Counselling Line), in a huge increase in demand, suggesting that stigma does not live in the perception of psychological support, but rather in the non-existence and/or inaccessibility of such support. Aligned with the conference's motto, "breaking walls, building bridges", we discussed the profession's identity and the relevance of seeking a common ground that promotes the union of all and brings clarity to the understanding of our role and value. First of all, we are all psychologists! (not clinical, neither organisational...). 

Nicola’s view was that throughout Europe, psychology as a discipline is vibrant.  It is one of the most popular subjects in higher education, there is a lot of demand for professional training places.  From the point of view of the public, there is increasing acceptance that psychological wellbeing is central to human health and wellbeing, and that getting professional support is OK.  

COVID-19 has had an important effect on how psychology is seen. 

• There is recognition of the importance of human behaviour in public health, of the importance of considering the mental health impact of public health measures, and this is openly talked about by national and European leaders.
  
  
• There is a willingness to set a collaborative research agenda among psychologists to advance the evidence base, engaging with writing rapid reviews, systematic reviews, and improving empirical research methodologies by developing longitudinal studies for example, being able quickly to adapt existing studies.  
  
  
• Governments are regularly including science as a matter of course, and this includes psychology, alongside economics in their policy and decision making.
   

There are some big social challenges facing psychology. Many would cite equality and levelling up as important issues, these of course existed before the pandemic but have been exacerbated by it as can be seen from looking at which people have been hardest hit. 

Climate change is a major global priority for the political leaders of the world, and is a declared global priority for psychology as well as being one of EFPA’s strategic priorities at the present time. The question might be asked, why are these challenges for psychology and society as a whole? One answer is they are structural long term issues that are harder to solve and less amenable to electorally popular short term fixes. We were asked about the European Green deal   which is aimed at transforming the economy of Europe, and what is the place of psychology. A key point is perhaps the commitment to ‘no person and no place left behind’. That means mental and emotional wellbeing, good places to live and work, family and community relationships and connections, all things that psychology deals with.  

Tiago described the roundtable as an opportunity to discuss how science based and psychological evidence could improve social and community policies.  He emphasised how the comprehension of human behaviour and decision making is indispensable for public policies in order to face the major societal challenges, and  the role of psychology in relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals.   

Effective interventions on the major societal challenges are important to achieve more trust, equal societies, well-being, social cohesion and inclusion for all. He said we still fail as society to take into consideration the levels of poverty and exclusion and we need to empower and promote the role of civil society on that and to guarantee more evidence based policies, community interventions and public polices informed by psychological science. 

Maria reflected that the participation in the roundtable debates and the Q & A session with the EFPSA representatives in Oporto was vivid, and relevant for the joint action on Community Psychology in European Universities. 

The students proposed a call for action towards training opportunities in this field of Psychology. We believe that Community Psychology has a role to play in (in)forming social policies; our experience has been anchored in three main strategies: 
a) training and local/ transnational networking; 
b) participating/coordinating within consortia for research and action; 
c) concrete intervention to inform social policies. 

The generation and co-creation of joint action in Community Psychology across Europe have been aspirational for ECPA (European Community Psychology Association), and the EFPA Community Psychology Standing Committee articulated efforts. There were valuable contributions of which we would emphasise the valuable contribution by Roerhle et al. (2020) in the European Psychologist, but with limited outreach. The advocacy for Community Psychology in European HEI is crucial for the future of the discipline in theory, research, and also for action. 

On the transnational and local training opportunities with key experts, it is crucial to generate dynamics involving several generations gathered around severe and persistent social problems as homelessness, migrations, deinstitutionalisation, interpersonal violence, including violence against women, and many other pressing social issues with a transformational and sustainable approach to social change and development. 

Concerning the active participation in European and Pan-European Research Network, we believe it represents an opportunity to affirm Community Psychology both as a science, including the science of implementation and evaluation, and combine/ merge knowledge with other Sciences. These dynamics increase the capacity to produce larger-scale impacts.  

The capacity to develop concrete community and evidence-based programmes and practices as key exemplars of lived-community psychology is relevant to demonstrate that communities are not mere abstractions of ideal social contexts. Communities are contexts where successes and failures, including unexpected effects, exist and need to be analysed and scrutinised. 

In terms of future challenges, we need to mind how climate change impacts the lives of real people; therefore we need to provide to the next generations of psychologists the capacity to co-construct initiatives that consider the contributions and leadership of younger generations to inspire and (in)form innovative social policies. 

Nicola’s comments conclude our review of the event

In order to be effective at the European level in contributing psychological science to policy, it is important to organise. This is true also at the national and global levels, and would apply to most third sector / civil society or membership organisations that wish to make an impact.

An important consideration is that Europe is a complex region, historically, and culturally.  There are 47 countries in the Council of Europe, 27 of which are in the EU.  Thinking about psychology, EFPA has 38 member countries out of the 47, including all of the 27.  This means some 300,000 psychologists, with their different needs, opinions and ambitions, diverse sub specialisms and therefore identities within the discipline, are within its umbrella.  

This breadth, diversity and sometimes competition can mean it is hard to show the outside world what psychology can offer and what its message is.  Often, organisations lobby for a particular population, or issue.  Psychology however ranges across all people of different cultures, ages, occupations … and a huge breadth of issues such as  health, education, the world of work, sport, traffic … . One way communicate a recognisable message from psychology is to major on cross cutting aspects such as prevention; another is to focus for a time on specific campaigns, such as (and this is a focus for many associations this year) what psychology can contribute to tackling the climate crisis.

The focus of this round table was evidence based policies within communities.  What can get in the way of using evidence based solutions?  Barriers can exist within the authorities, community, and indeed psychologists ourselves.  How things have always been done, what is popular, intuitively obvious, may not be the right approach.  When faced with a new problem especially a crisis to address, specific evidence may already exist (for example in systematic reviews). What is generically known can be repurposed.  It is also important to identify early the gaps where further research is needed and how those can be filled. How are evidence based interventions for communities chosen?  Engagement is needed, to draw on local knowledge, cultural and situational fit, to adapt. It is important to foster trust in science, understanding of the scientific method, how scientific consensus is arrived at, and have trusted local figures to communicate. 
All this can help to ‘break walls’ and ‘build bridges’.