UK pressure group calls for more science and engineering funding
The British pressure group Campaign for Science and Engineering in the UK (CaSE) has renewed calls for increased investment in UK science projects, out of fear of competition from other EU and non-EU countries. Many of the suggestions echo the recent Aho group report on research and innovation in Europe. The comments came from questions posed by CaSE to its members. Members were asked what they would like to see under the UK government's comprehensive spending review, due in 2007. CaSE has two stated aims - to forge ever better and closer relationships with government at all levels, and to outline what the science and engineering communities (or at least, CaSE members) need, and 'define a clear agenda of what it wishes to achieve'. The Opinion Forum is based upon research undertaken by CaSE in January 2006, taken from a meeting, followed up by correspondence and interviews. The report is split into four parts and outlines areas of concern and areas members would like the UK government to spend its money on. Part one focuses on the economy. The forum specifically addresses an uncertain future: 'Participants in the Opinion Forum agreed that to continue competing effectively, Britain should be ready for various future scenarios,' in other words, research bodies need to be both flexible and pragmatic. For example, the report stresses that the success of British research and engineering does not depend on having all parts of the supply chain based in the UK. The report also reminds readers that companies should exploit areas of industry that are easier to compete in. It suggests using Ireland as a base for developing research and development activities, as the Irish government offers incentives in this area. The report is critical of the way in which funds are used by local governments, which it says 'do not have a sufficiently clearly-defined role', and that while local networks can work extremely well, research and development is very much a global issue. Unsurprisingly, the report calls for increased investment in science, listing the following as requiring particular attention: - climate change; - meeting energy needs; - maximising the potential for European cooperation; - increasing the efficiency of the public sector; - encouraging high technology investment to replace older industries which are - moving to countries with lower costs; - developing strong links with the major emerging economies of Brazil, India, China and Russia. The report also supports knowledge transfer between the public sector, industry and academic institutions, particularly in developing spin-off companies from universities to maximise the potential of new developments. The second part of the report focuses on education. 'In the past few years, the organisation and resourcing of science education have become one of the most serious concerns of participants,' reads the report. Two of the most pressing issues are: 'The shortage of qualified school teachers and the lack of funding for teaching science and engineering at university level.' The report notes that the decline in students taking science courses represents a very real threat to the execution of science and research, and that the government should provide more investment here. Research-based courses are more expensive to fund, but for university education, the group agrees that more investment needs to come for pupils taking science and engineering courses. The report states that: 'University teaching in the sciences and engineering is now universally acknowledged to be inadequately resourced,' which could be remedied by giving science fairer weighting, fees reflecting the realities of higher education costs and endowments, from alumni and others, to give universities a chance of independence from government. Part three addresses policy coordination, which members felt was not consistent enough. Members felt funding was not sufficiently stable at the grass-roots level, and that while responsibility for science and technology was good in some areas of government, it is poor in others. They also felt that the government imposes too much bureaucracy. In part four, CaSE members make recommendations for their own industry. Accounts have been standardised to make funding applications easier, but members felt that this could potentially jeopardise funding from charitable institutions, which work on very different models. They also felt that career structures need to be overhauled to give researchers more flexibility, and three areas - interdisciplinary research, facilities and underpinning disciplines - are not given sufficient funding or prominence. Finally, the report seeks to address underinvestment by the private sector, which has been falling. The precise reasons for this remain unclear, but are thought to include the high cost of research in the UK, short term goals driven by the financial sector, concerns over public attitudes to science, especially animal testing, and tax breaks or incentives not currently offered in the UK.
Countries
United Kingdom