R&D risks being seen as luxury rather than necessity amid cost of living crisis

Public support for R&D is “fragile”, given the current pressures on public finances, new polling has revealed.

Science advocacy group the Campaign for Science and Engineering warned that R&D is at risk of being seen as a luxury rather than a necessity after its new polling showed that over 60 per cent of people either agreed that “R&D doesn’t benefit people like them”, or felt neutral or unsure about R&D’s impact.

In a report released on 28 February, Case said that this was a “precarious” position to be in for a sector that receives “substantial public investment”. It urged science advocates to make the benefits of R&D more visible, as the polling data suggests that tangible messages about R&D could change people’s minds.

“Although the public are broadly supportive of R&D, that support is fragile,” Case said.

“Unsurprisingly, given its intangibility to many people, R&D risks being labelled a ‘luxury’ rather than a necessity, especially amid a cost of living crisis.”

Given the choice, 46 per cent of the 18,000 people surveyed said they would only choose to invest more in R&D when the economy was in better shape. Over a third said they could think of very few or no ways that R&D improved their lives.

“We are very fortunate that there is currently significant political consensus on the need to invest in and support R&D. But this consensus relies on a strong case being made to the public on how R&D can improve their lives,” said Stian Westlake, chief executive of the Royal Statistical Society.

“Case’s research will be invaluable in helping policymakers understand what the public values when it comes to R&D, and shaping policy and communications to be more resonant and effective.”

Nurses over research

When presented with a hypothetical government proposal to immediately halve the R&D budget, a third of people were supportive.

When this cut was framed as freeing up money for hiring nurses or lowering energy bills, a majority (52 per cent) supported halving the R&D budget.

Case said this sentiment was echoed in the focus groups that were carried out, with one woman saying other areas that the government oversaw needed to be sorted out “before we start spending money on possible, probable, maybes and maybe nots” in the form of R&D.

“Wealthy people” and “big businesses” were cited as the major beneficiaries of R&D and people viewed R&D activity as being clustered in London and South East England, according to the report. Case said there needed to be clearer messaging about R&D’s benefits and its UK-wide footprint to remedy this viewpoint.

The polling found that linking R&D to problems such as the cost of living crisis, the sustainability of the NHS and the impact of climate change would help to make it feel more relevant to people.

The chief executive of national funder UK Research and Innovation, Ottoline Leyser, said research and innovation must be a “shared endeavour” that brings people together, and that the survey results “provide an important insight into how this can be best achieved”.

The polling was commissioned by Case as part of its wider Discovery Decade project, which aims to help R&D organisations and advocates to connect with a broader base of public supporters.

“The UK can never hope to become an R&D-intensive nation if the public aren’t part of that journey,” said Kim Shillinglaw, chair of the Discovery Decade project.

“This new data is the start of encouraging the sector to work together on building a science-positive, innovation-positive society, and [to] grow the public identity of R&D to a place where it feels non-negotiable as a priority.”

The post UK public support for R&D is ‘fragile’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

“Historic” agreement clears the path for association to EU science programmes, says European Commission president

The European Commission’s president Ursula von der Leyen has said that work can start “immediately” on securing UK association to EU R&D programmes once the agreed Northern Ireland deal is implemented.

Her comments came at a joint press conference with UK prime minister Rishi Sunak, where the leaders hailed a “decisive breakthrough” in talks over trade in Northern Ireland.

UK participation in the R&D programme has been held up owing to a dispute over the Northern Ireland protocol, leaving UK grant winners from the EU’s Horizon Europe programme unable to directly access any funding they win.

Participation in the EU’s nuclear research initiative Euratom and the Earth-observation programme Copernicus has also been put on hold as a result.

But speaking at the press conference on 27 February, the two leaders confirmed an agreement on the protocol had been reached.

‘Free-flowing trade in the UK’

The deal has been described as “a breakthrough” by Sunak and as “historic” by von der Leyen. Agreed in principle by the two leaders, it includes issues such as medicines approval, taxes on goods, and a Stormont “brake” for changes to EU goods rules.

“Together we have changed the original protocol and today are announcing the new Windsor Framework,” Sunak said.

“Today’s agreement delivers free-flowing trade within the whole of the United Kingdom, protects Northern Ireland’s place in our union and safeguard’s sovereignty for the people of Northern Ireland.”

Sunak said on Twitter: “We’re also delivering a landmark settlement on medicines. From now on, drugs approved for use by the UK’s medicines regulator will be automatically available in every pharmacy and hospital in Northern Ireland.”

‘Good news for scientists’

Von der Leyen said: “We knew we had to work hard with clear minds and determination but we also both knew that we could do it because we were both generally committed to find a practical solution for people and for all communities in Northern Ireland.”

Asked what the deal would mean for UK participation in Horizon Europe, she said it was “good news for scientists and researchers in the EU and in the UK”.

“The moment we have finished this agreement—so it’s an agreement in principle—the moment it is implemented I’m happy to start immediately right now the work on an association agreement which is the pre-condition to join Horizon Europe. So [it’s] good news for all those working in research and science.”

Her comments will likely be widely welcomed by the sector, but also mean the sector will have to wait for the deal to be approved by both sides and implemented before there is EU approval of the UK’s association to EU R&D programmes.

Details of the deal are yet to be published and Sunak has promised to give the House of Commons a vote on it.

Adrian Smith, president of the Royal Society,  welcomed von der Leyen’s “commitment to progressing association as soon as the Windsor Framework is implemented”.

“With the Northern Ireland protocol impasse resolved, we need to swiftly secure access to the EU’s international research programmes,” Smith said.

He added: “It is more than two years since the government agreed association to Horizon Europe, Euratom and Copernicus—two years of delays that have damaged science across Europe. These schemes support outstanding international collaboration, and the sooner we join them, the better for everyone.”

The post New UK-EU deal ‘good news’ for Horizon, says von der Leyen appeared first on Research Professional News.

Rate of virus in birds raises fears of increased transmission to humans

The UK Health Security Agency has said it is working to identify bird flu ‘knowledge gaps’, amid fears that the virus might jump more frequently from birds to humans.

In a 23 February update, the agency said there is an increased chance of people encountering the virus due to the high levels in birds and that it is working with partners—including the Animal and Plant Health Agency—to identify ‘knowledge gaps’ around avian influenza, such as whether lateral flow devices could be deployed to test for the bird flu in humans.

Other knowledge gaps include the development of a blood test that detects antibodies against the virus and analysis of the genetic mutations that would signal an increased risk to human health.

‘Vigilant of changing risk’

“The latest evidence suggests that the avian influenza viruses we’re seeing circulating in birds do not currently spread easily to people,” said Meera Chand, incident director for avian influenza at UKHSA. 

“However, viruses constantly evolve, and we remain vigilant for any evidence of changing risk to the population, as well as working with partners to address gaps in the scientific evidence.”

‘Tragic’ bird flu death

The briefing came ahead of reports on 24 February that a girl in Cambodia had died from bird flu.

James Wood, head of the department of veterinary medicine at the University of Cambridge, described the death as “tragic”.

“Clearly the virus needs careful monitoring and surveillance to check that it has not mutated or recombined,” he said.

“But the limited numbers of cases of human disease have not increased markedly and this one case in itself does not signal the global situation has suddenly changed.”

Jonathan Ball, professor of molecular virology at the University of Nottingham, said: “This is a very sad outcome for the young girl infected with a particularly aggressive form of avian influenza or ‘bird flu’…Thankfully, human infections are still rare, and the likelihood of onward human to human transmission very low.”

‘Low risk to humans’

But he added: “This virus keeps cropping up in various mammals and this could potentially increase the possibility of further human infections. 

“The risk to humans is still very low, but it’s important that we continue to monitor circulation of flu in both bird and mammal populations and do everything we can to reduce the number of infections seen.”

Ball underscored the importance of efforts to develop the next generation of vaccines.

The post UK health agency examining bird flu ‘knowledge gaps’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Devolved government announces mission-based approach and says bemoaning lost funding is “not productive”

The Welsh Government has unveiled a new mission-based innovation strategy that seeks to drive up investment in the nation’s R&D sector amid Brexit-related uncertainty.

The Welsh R&D sector has been hit particularly hard by the loss of EU Structural Funds, which were used to fund numerous university-related projects. There is also ongoing uncertainty over UK association to the EU’s R&D programme, Horizon Europe, leaving researchers unable to directly win funding.

But, writing in the strategy, which was published on 27 February, Welsh economy minister Vaughan Gething said bemoaning the loss of funding “is not productive”.

“It’s a reality check, for sure. There will be less money…and Wales will have less control over it,” he said.

The goal of the strategy, Gething explained, was to “point the way to a different approach to innovation in the future”, adding: “We can’t compete in everything; we can adopt a mission-based attitude.”

The strategy, titled Wales Innovates: Creating a stronger, fairer, greener Wales, sets out four specific “missions” that will shape its new future outside of the EU.

These include a mission to create an education system that “supports the development of innovation skills and knowledge throughout people’s lives in Wales”.

With the ending of structural funding, the strategy says researchers will need to transition to alternative funding sources, including the UK government, national funder UK Research and Innovation, charities and businesses.

Business R&D funding

The second mission sets out the devolved government’s plan to build an economy that “innovates for growth, collaborates across sectors for solutions to society’s challenges, adopts new technologies for efficiency and productivity, uses resources proportionately and allows citizens to share wealth through fair work”.

Currently, the strategy says, the small proportion of large R&D businesses mean “Wales has not achieved its potential in traditional UK competitive bid funding rounds”, with just 3 per cent of Innovate UK’s budget invested in the country and activity concentrated in South Wales.

It sets out the aim to “consistently achieve 3 per cent in three years’ time, with a more even geographical spread”, with a view to increasing this share to 5 per cent of Innovate UK’s budget by 2030.

“We will apply similar targets to other sources of innovation funding in due course, including other research councils within the UKRI structure,” it says.

The third mission, which centres on health and wellbeing, aims to build a “coherent innovation ecosystem where the health and social care sector collaborates with industry, academia and the third sector to deliver greater value and impact for citizens, the economy and the environment”.

To achieve this, the Welsh Government says it will target “new and different ways of working, identify opportunities to bring additional value to patients, lever additional funding and better support the adoption of innovation at scale”.

The final mission is to “optimise our natural resources for the protection and strengthening of climate and nature resilience”.

“We will focus innovation efforts of the ecosystem towards tackling the climate and nature crises simultaneously, ensuring a just transition to a wellbeing economy,” the strategy says.

The post Welsh innovation strategy sets out post-Brexit future appeared first on Research Professional News.

Sector awaiting next steps after von der Leyen and Sunak agree on Northern Ireland protocol

A UK-EU deal on the Northern Ireland protocol reportedly reached today will elicit a “sigh of relief” from researchers, as it paves the way for the UK to associate to the bloc’s R&D schemes, a research policy expert has said.

Prime minister Rishi Sunak held a summit on 27 February with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, at which they reached an agreement on the protocol.

The long-running spat over post-Brexit trade in Northern Ireland has been a major barrier to the UK joining the EU’s €95.5bn (£84.2bn) R&D programme, Horizon Europe, as well as the nuclear research initiative Euratom and the Earth-observation programme Copernicus.

With a deal to resolve the dispute, hopes have been raised across the R&D sector that the EU will now allow the UK to take part in the schemes.

“We welcome the meeting between Ursula von der Leyen and Prime Minister Sunak this afternoon,” said Diana Beech, chief executive of London Higher and a former adviser to three universities ministers. “We hope that this will finally unlock access for the UK to participate in Horizon Europe, giving our world-class universities and researchers the funding that they need to ensure that the UK remains a science superpower.”

She added that it is hoped this new Brexit deal will give research-performing organisations the “certainty and stability needed to continue powering the engine of UK innovation” and that the newly formed Department of Science, Innovation and Technology should now commit to “funding association to Horizon”.

But, speaking ahead of the official announcement today, some experts have also warned that hurdles remain.

“The long-awaited deal on the Northern Ireland protocol will be greeted with a sigh of relief by the research community, who remain strongly supportive of continued association to Horizon Europe,” said James Wilsdon, a professor of research policy at UCL.

“But we aren’t out of the woods yet. Three further hurdles will now need to be jumped.”

Sunak will firstly need to get the deal over the line without hardline Conservative Brexiters and Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party “sabotaging it”, Wilsdon said.

Secondly, there will need to be “fresh haggling” between London and Brussels on the costs of the UK’s association to EU programmes. “I’m sure [this] will be resolved but [it] could slow things down,” Wilsdon explained.

The final hurdle will be the time it will take to “undo all the damage of the past few years, as collaborative networks need to be rebuilt and repaired”, Wilsdon said.

“I would expect it to take two to three years for levels of UK participation to return to where we would want and expect them to be.”

Flexibility urged

Kurt Deketelaere, secretary-general of the League of European Research Universities, also said news of a deal raised hope for UK association to EU programmes, but warned that revisions to the earlier association deal might take some time.

The terms of the UK’s Horizon association were set out in a trade and cooperation agreement between the UK and EU signed in 2020, and would have to be updated.

“Let’s hope that revisions and updates of the earlier association deal can be kept to a minimum, and both sides act with flexibility and goodwill so that we can welcome all UK-based researchers as soon as possible back at full strength in EU-funded research proposals and projects,” Deketelaere said.

Martin Smith, head of policy at health research funder Wellcome, echoed this sentiment, saying he hoped for “swift progress” to finalise a Horizon agreement given the groundwork for UK association was laid in 2020.

“If a deal on the Northern Ireland protocol can be made to stick, it would remove the biggest political barrier to the UK joining Horizon Europe,” he said. “Unlocking easy research collaboration would be a great result for researchers and businesses across the UK and EU.”

Jan Palmowski, secretary-general of the Guild of European Research Intensive Universities, described the dispute around Northern Ireland as “the big stumbling block for the EU’s finalising the accession of the UK” and said that with this resolved “association must happen without delay.”

But he warned that further talks on the revised costs of the UK’s delayed association should be done swiftly to avoid further harm to the sector.

He said: “The UK has now asked to reconsider the agreement around the cost of participation as an associated country, but all sides must understand that too much time has been lost; if new technical issues are raised, these must be resolved urgently.”

UPDATED AFTER PUBLICATION—This story was updated after publication to reflect that a deal has now been announced.

The post EU-UK deal prompts ‘sigh of relief’ from researchers appeared first on Research Professional News.

On conflict’s anniversary, universities say partnerships with Ukrainian institutions “will last for years to come”

Universities and learned societies have pledged to continue their support for Ukraine, one year on from Russia’s invasion.

On the anniversary of the conflict, vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK said it was “immensely proud” of its twinning scheme with Ukrainian institutions and the “impact it has had on Ukrainian universities devastated by war”.

More than 100 partnerships have been established through the government-supported scheme, which helps UK universities partner with Ukrainian institutions to share resources.

To date, this support has included donated ambulances, help to equip bomb shelters, as well as the provision of study placements, English classes and mental health support.

“One year since the invasion, partnerships are continuing to grow stronger and have been a beacon of light for many Ukrainian students and staff,” Jamie Arrowsmith, director of the international arm of UUK, told Research Professional News.

UUK set up the scheme in partnership with Cormack Consultancy Group and it received a funding boost of £5 million from Research England in November 2022.

Arrowsmith said the extra funding would contribute towards the establishment of new national research centres, as well as helping to rebuild those destroyed during the war.

“The strong bonds that have grown between institutions give us hope that these partnerships will last for years to come, and that with continued investment and support, Ukraine can, and will, emerge stronger from the war,” he added.

Support from learned societies

Learned societies have also pledged to continue their support for Ukrainian academics.

Last year, the British Academy helped to set up a £13.3m government-backed fellowship programme for those fleeing the war, in partnership with the Council for At-Risk Academics.

The scheme gives Ukrainian academics and their dependants support to continue their research in the UK for up to two years. The funding covers their salary, research expenses and living costs.

The academy said it was “extremely proud” to have helped support more than 140 researchers and 190 dependants through the scheme so far with placements across 40 universities.

“The breadth of research expertise across the cohort is incredibly rich and we are pleased to play a part in ensuring the prosperity and continuation of Ukrainian research,” said Hetan Shah, the British Academy’s chief executive.

Meanwhile, the Royal Society of Chemistry said it would “continue to reach out to members of our community in Ukraine” and would continue to make available support through its Chemists’ Community Fund, which offers financial support to struggling members.

In addition, the society confirmed that it would continue to pause its engagement with institutes in Russia, for example, preventing access to RSC journal content and books, and stopping all sales and marketing activities.

More widely, the UK government has suspended publicly funded research and innovation collaborations with Russian universities and companies that are of strategic benefit to the Russian state.

The post UK R&D sector pledges to continue support for Ukraine appeared first on Research Professional News.

New Pirbright Institute building to aid vaccine research against backdrop of H5N1 bird flu threat

A new UK facility providing “mission critical” infrastructure for the study of infectious diseases in poultry was launched yesterday.

The Biggs Avian Research Building was opened at the Pirbright Institute in Surrey, a research centre for infectious diseases in animals, as part of a £350 million capital investment from government through the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC).

Bryan Charleston, director of the Pirbright Institute, said the facility would enable researchers “to study important diseases of poultry to develop measures to prevent disease and improve welfare and productivity”.

The new facility comes against a backdrop of growing concern over a global outbreak of H5N1 bird flu. The disease has been spreading in domestic and wild birds, and while it very rarely infects humans, concerns have been raised that a mutation could enable the virus to spread more easily in mammals.

Melanie Welham, executive chair of BBSRC, said that the UK “is a world leader in its scientific response to disease outbreaks such as avian influenza”.

“It is mission-critical that staff at the Pirbright Institute have the right infrastructure and facilities needed to deliver world-class research outcomes,” she added.

The Biggs Avian Research Building, which has a lighting system to simulate dawn-to-dusk cycles, will be used in ongoing vaccine research programmes at Pirbright, including work towards the goal of producing universal flu vaccines. 

The post ‘Mission critical’ research facility for poultry diseases opened appeared first on Research Professional News.

Economic and Social Research Council gets long-term boss after two years without permanent leader

The Economic and Social Research Council has announced that Stian Westlake—a former adviser to three science ministers and head of the Royal Statistical Society—is to be its new executive chair, following two years without a permanent leader.

ESRC’s former executive chair, Jennifer Rubin, stepped down in January 2021, and the funder has been led by interim executive chair Alison Park ever since.

A replacement for Rubin was found at the beginning of 2022. But Kwasi Kwarteng, who was business secretary at the time, controversially vetoed the appointment of Jonathan Michie, president of Kellogg College at the University of Oxford. The minister later defended his action as a “finely balanced call”.

ESRC, which sits under national funder UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), confirmed on 22 February that a permanent replacement has been found in Westlake, who will take up the role in the late spring.

‘Help social science thrive’

Westlake said: “I firmly believe that rigorous, engaged social science holds the answer to our most pressing challenges—and can change the world for the better.

“I look forward to working with the research community, with users of research and with the public to help social science thrive and make its benefits felt widely.”

Westlake was an adviser to three successive UK science ministers—Jo Johnson, Sam Gyimah and Chris Skidmore—under Theresa May’s premiership from 2017 to 2019 and is currently chief executive of the Royal Statistical Society (RSS).

At RSS, Westlake led the Covid-19 taskforce and its Alliance for Useful Evidence project, which created a network to promote the smarter use of evidence in social policy and practice.

He is the former director of policy and research at innovation foundation Nesta and has co-authored two economics books.

‘Impressive track record’

UKRI chief executive Ottoline Leyser said Westlake “will bring a wealth of experience to the role, combined with an impressive track record of ensuring high-quality social and data science is placed at the heart of decision-making. His leadership of and broad engagement with the research, innovation, business and policy-making communities across the UK will be a huge asset in realising UK Research and Innovation’s mission.”

The news comes after the Natural Environment Research Council announced this month that its executive chair Duncan Wingham is stepping down. The Medical Research Council is also currently without a long-term executive chair after Fiona Watt stepped down last year.

The post Stian Westlake to become ESRC executive chair appeared first on Research Professional News.

Outgoing director reflects on his regrets and successes after 10 years at the helm

The outgoing director of the Wellcome Trust has said his “biggest regret” during his time at the health research funder was being “too slow” to address research culture problems.

Jeremy Farrar was speaking just days ahead of his planned departure from the funder on 25 February for the chief scientist role at the World Health Organization.

Reflecting on his 10 years at the Wellcome helm at a press briefing on 20 February, Farrar said: “I think the biggest regret was undoubtedly being too slow to appreciate the need to address the issues of inequity and racism in research culture, both internally and externally. That’s without doubt my greatest regret.”

His comments come in the midst of a major push at Wellcome to address research culture issues in recent years, with mixed results.

Institutionally racist

In August 2022, Farrar admitted the funder was “still doing too little to use its power and influence to counter racism” and remained an “institutionally racist organisation”. 

His admission followed an evaluation that found the funder had “failed to meet its original commitments to implement antiracism practice, [and] due to a series of harmful action and inaction, institutional racism has been allowed to fester within the organisation”.

Since then, Wellcome has announced it is exploring the creation of a dedicated funding scheme for early career Black researchers, and it recently advertised for a chief equity, diversity and inclusion officer to create “systemic and lasting change”.

Ebola breakthrough

During the briefing, Farrar also reflected on some of the funder’s greatest successes during his time there, including contributing to the development of the first Ebola vaccines and its work on the human genome.

“I think that what you feel most proud about is where you’ve, yes, you’ve delivered something of crucial importance,” he said. “But in doing so, you’ve changed the system that then allows other things to be done.”

In the case of Ebola, Farrar said the vaccine “convinced people who were previously not convinced that you had to do research in an epidemic”.

This laid the groundwork for much of the research conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic, he added. This included setting up the Recovery trial to identify treatments for the disease, and Isaric, the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, a global federation of clinical research networks that aims to prevent illness and deaths of infectious disease outbreaks.

Pandemic mistakes

Elsewhere, Farrar, who is a former member of the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, also criticised the government’s failure to learn from its early mistakes during Covid-19.

He described the early days and weeks of the pandemic as “chaotic”.

“The tragedy for me is that in essence too many governments, including this one, did not then iterate and learn the lessons. There could have been a much better iterative process to say: ‘That’s what we did in January, February, March, April, May. How can we use the summer better of 2020?

“By autumn of 2020, we knew there were vaccines coming, we knew they were going to be safe and effective and we only had to buy ourselves a little more time. And we could have, in my view, prevented the massive impact of the wave of early 2021.”

The post Farrar: ‘I was too slow to tackle Wellcome research culture issues’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Coalition of investors aims to plug gaps preventing translation of UK research into green companies

An initiative to coordinate investment in clean technologies has been launched by UK prime minister Rishi Sunak and US philanthropist Bill Gates.

Launched at Imperial College London on 15 February, Cleantech for UK is a coalition of investors and businesses that aims to speed up the translation of research into clean technology businesses.

Speaking at the launch, Sunak said that investing in renewables and clean technology was “one of the best ways to strengthen our energy security, create better-paid jobs and grow the economy”.

“With the launch of Cleantech for UK, a new generation of talented British businesses can be confident that they have the backing they need to unlock green solutions to some of the biggest challenges we face.”

Gates, who is supporting Cleantech for UK through his Breakthrough Energy fund, which aims to accelerate the transition to clean energy, said the UK “has all the ingredients to become a major player in the global push to build a net zero emissions future, including world-class research facilities and forward-looking investors”.

Founding members of the initiative are: Imperial College London’s cleantech accelerator Undaunted, cleantech venture capital investors Clean Growth Fund, Kiko Ventures and Breakthrough Energy Ventures, climate-led investor Just Climate and the alternative asset platform Legal & General Capital. Together, they have combined funds of over £6 billion.

Investment gaps identified

According to a report published by Cleantech Group, the consultancy overseeing the initiative, the UK is already home to “a mature cleantech ecosystem, a thriving innovation scene and strong overall investment”.

However, it says this “world-leading capability is not consistently translated into world-leading cleantech scale-ups”.

Gaps in funding for UK companies at early and scale-up stages are identified by the report, which suggests that the British cleantech industry needs “smart, targeted interventions aimed at boosting early-stage innovation [and] de-risking first commercial projects”.

It also finds that intellectual property from outside the ‘golden triangle’ of Cambridge, London and Oxford is “not being systematically commercialised”, that there is “high variability of support and terms offered to university spinouts” and that new technology transfer models are needed “to get new ventures out of the lab”.

Nonetheless, the UK attracts significant amounts of cleantech venture capital investment, the report says, totalling £3.2bn in both 2021 and 2022.

The post Sunak and Gates launch clean technology investment initiative appeared first on Research Professional News.

Newly created executive-level role to help “foster an inclusive and equitable culture” at health funder

The Wellcome Trust is looking for a “highly collaborative” chief equity, diversity and inclusion officer to create “systemic and lasting change”, as part of its efforts to improve research culture.

The newly created full-time job offers a £211,500 salary and the chosen candidate will sit on the major health funder’s executive leadership team.

Wellcome first announced it would create the role in August last year as part of wider efforts to stamp out racism, after an external investigation found it was still an “institutionally racist organisation”. The funder has also recently announced it is exploring the creation of a dedicated funding scheme for early career Black researchers.

The chosen candidate will work with Wellcome’s chief executive, executive leadership team and global board to “foster an inclusive and equitable culture at senior leadership levels”, the job advert said.

They will “set, evolve and implement an ambitious, multifaceted equity, diversity and inclusion strategy for the staff and the organisation as a whole”.

‘Systemic and lasting change’

Working alongside the charity’s partners, including the Wellcome Collection and Wellcome’s Berlin Office, they will “strengthen the shared vision, mission and strategy for systemic and lasting change internally, as well as in the broader research community through Wellcome’s funding activities”.

The ideal candidate is described as a “thoughtful, collaborative and agile individual who will be excited by the prospect of shaping and delivering on the strategic EDI direction impacting people within and beyond the walls of Wellcome”.

The closing date for applications is 5 March.

The post Wellcome seeks ‘collaborative’ chief diversity officer appeared first on Research Professional News.

Opinions differ on whether the UK needs an independent research integrity regulator

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield published a paper falsely linking the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to autism. It resulted in a sharp decline in vaccination uptake and disease outbreaks across the world. 

Later described by researchers looking into the scandal as the “most damaging medical hoax of the last 100 years”, the Wakefield case is perhaps the most well-known example of research misconduct in the UK. 

Over the past two decades, conversations around research misconduct have evolved as the academic community has recognised that major research fraud, such as Wakefield’s case, is part of a broader problem ranging from outright duplicity to avoidable error.

More recently, a Manchester-based PhD student became the subject of widespread outcry after publishing a paper in which he used masturbation to Japanese comics depicting young boys as a research method (see box).

Investigations into that case are still ongoing, but the incident has prompted more soul-searching about whether there are suitable checks and balances on research.

A quarter of a century after Wakefield, the question of how to secure research integrity has still not been answered.

Self-policing problems

In 2018, a House of Commons science and technology committee inquiry into research integrity warned of the potential for conflicts of interest with the current system of “self-policing” in academia.

At the moment, researchers in UK academia are expected to meet agreed standards on research integrity. If they do not, it falls largely to the institutions that employ them to take action. There is no national body with the power to investigate or to probe the handling of investigations by universities and other employers.

MPs behind the 2018 inquiry argued that the UK should follow the example of Australia and Canada and set up a committee under its national funder, UK Research and Innovation, to independently verify “whether a research institution has followed appropriate processes to investigate misconduct”.

Although the UK Committee on Research Integrity (UK CORI) was set up in the wake of that inquiry, it does not have that power to judge whether the right processes have been followed.

UK CORI is exploring whether something stronger is needed. In November 2022, co-chair of the committee Rachael Gooberman-Hill suggested it would examine the question of whether the UK needs a research integrity regulator as part of its agenda, despite stressing that she is still “on the fence” herself.

Whether it is a full new regulatory body or more general shifts in research culture, many are agreed that something has to change.

Disaster waiting

When discussing the need for an independent regulator, feelings can run high.

Simon Cohen, chief executive officer of pharmaceutical company and SME funder Innovate Pharmaceuticals, warned delegates at an online conference last year that just one court case “has the potential to bring the entire sector into disrepute”. 

“Unless…a clear and trustworthy regulator structure is put into place, this is a disaster waiting to happen,” he said.

Others argue that the sector is already working hard to create high standards of research integrity. The Concordat to Support Research Integrity, which offers a framework for good research conduct and governance, was updated in 2019 to strengthen the commitments placed on universities and other research organisations. Under the terms of the concordat, universities must publish annual research integrity reports. 

Many universities appear to take their responsibilities seriously—when Research Fortnight contacted the 24 Russell Group universities, 21 said they had either already published their 2021-22 reports, or planned to do so within the next few weeks.

Question of trust

James Parry, chief executive of national charity the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO), which gives guidance on good research practice, is not convinced about the need for a new body with statutory powers, but he is keen to see improvements to the oversight of research integrity and argues that there is “a confidence gap and a trust gap”, with researchers lacking confidence in the current system.

The lack of oversight within the UK research integrity system is problematic for everyone involved, he says. “Because we have a system of self-regulation, how do the individuals involved in misconduct investigations know that they are doing the right thing?”

Parry says a lot of research organisations have said they would benefit from an external body looking at their research misconduct processes or the outcomes of specific investigations where an individual or another organisation is unhappy with the outcome. “That presence through a national committee would greatly help trust in UK research, it would help those who have concerns, and those who are the subject of concerns, and those who are currently responsible for investigating concerns,” he adds.

Parry believes that another challenge the UK needs to address lies in the structure of its research integrity system, which is made up of researchers, funders and employers. “Researchers are checked in their practices by employers, employers are overseen by funders, and the funders are doing a lot of good work on research integrity. But…who is checking up on them? Who is driving harmonisation and adopting common practices within funding agencies?” he asks.

Parry says that, ultimately, there needs to be positive change for UK research integrity, with or without a regulator.

Heavy repercussions

In January, UKRIO launched a review to investigate the barriers faced by organisations when dealing with research misconduct cases. The review will propose actions that institutions should take to alleviate the “tensions” and avoid the “repercussions faced when they investigate possible research misconduct”, such as reputational damage.

A spokesperson for UKRI, which oversees UK CORI, said it was “committed to acting transparently and working with the sector on issues related to research integrity”, and that it had “consulted extensively” in the creation of the committee.

It also said it was “committed to working towards positive change across the UK research system so that everyone involved in conducting research is working in a positive environment”, and that research “is done with honesty, care and respect, openness and transparency, rigour, and accountability—the principles of research integrity which form a basis for high integrity research”.

Change across the research system is something that some say is needed, with a narrow focus on misconduct unlikely to bring meaningful change. The ‘publish or perish’ culture, with researchers’ careers dependent on their peer-reviewed track record, is still very much a feature of large swathes of academia. This can encourage researchers to prioritise getting data and getting results over following best practice at all times.

Petra Boynton, a social psychologist and research consultant, is among those who believes all research culture needs to be looked at to improve integrity. “We might want to have integrity but research culture as a whole is so broken that trying to make it integral is very difficult,” she says. “But people are resistant to thinking about that because it gets in the way of getting on with their work. I think that is where the problem lies.”

Boynton is not keen on the idea of setting up a regulator to scrutinise research integrity, saying she is “sceptical” that a regulator could improve research integrity without wider, university-led changes to research culture.

“I think the term ‘regulator’ suggests there is a tick-box thing we can measure ourselves against rather than a nurturing approach so actually we can do research better,” she says.

Whether UK research eventually finds itself under the scrutiny of a new regulator or not, questions around how academia tightens up research integrity to prevent the next Wakefield will linger. 

Ethics and ethos

In August 2022, the University of Manchester and academic publisher Sage both launched investigations into the case of a PhD student who had used masturbation to comics as a research method. 

The student, Karl Andersson, was researching the Japanese subculture shota, which features sexualised cartoons of young boys. The article was withdrawn from the journal, Qualitative Research, which said there had been “a lack of clarity and hence ethical scrutiny at the time of the initial submission”.

In January, Sage said it had carried out an overhaul of its ethics and submissions processes, following widespread publicity of the case.

An investigation by Greater Manchester Police is ongoing.

This article also appeared in Research Fortnight

The post Research culture: Watching over academia appeared first on Research Professional News.

Institute’s human genetics boss, Matt Hurles, to take over from Mike Stratton later this year

The Wellcome Sanger Institute has chosen the current head of its human genetics programme, Matt Hurles, as its new director.

The institute—which specialises in genomic research and is largely funded by the Wellcome Trust—said Hurles would start the role later in the year, following a handover period with the current director Mike Stratton, who has been in post for 13 years.

“I am hugely honoured and tremendously energised to lead the Sanger Institute into the future,” Hurles said as his appointment was announced on 13 February. “These are incredibly exciting times in genomics research and I am confident that Sanger science in our next decade will be as momentous and enduring as in our first three decades.”

Since 2017 Hurles (pictured) has led the genetics programme at the Cambridge-based institute, where his work focuses on the genetic causes of developmental disorders and DNA mutation through generations. He was elected as fellow of the UK Academy of Medical Sciences in 2017 and fellow of the Royal Society in 2019.

Hurles was selected by the institute’s Genome Research Limited board after a global search for a director, which started in February last year.

‘Honour of a lifetime’

Current director Stratton is set to remain at the institute, where he will continue conducting cancer research. He described his time as director as the “honour of a lifetime” and welcomed Hurles to the role, saying he would support him “in any way possible in the future”.

Paul Schreier, incoming interim chief executive of the Wellcome Trust and chair of the Genome Research Limited board, also welcomed the new director. He added that the funder looks forward to working with him to “continue cultivating the Sanger Institute’s world-leading role in genome research, in turn advancing our understanding of human health”.

Schreier is set to become Wellcome’s interim boss on 25 February when current director Jeremy Farrar steps down.

The post Wellcome Sanger Institute appoints new director appeared first on Research Professional News.

Funder launches survey to shape the scheme’s development and understand barriers Black researchers face

The Wellcome Trust is exploring the creation of a dedicated funding scheme for early career Black researchers.

The health-research funder has launched a survey which it said will help inform the development of the funding scheme, as well as understand the barriers that Black researchers face.

“We want to understand the most effective ways that targeted funding can make a difference in supporting Black researchers in the UK,” said Diego Baptista, head of research and funding equity at the funder.

“Taking this approach to tackle specific issues will allow us to bring about change most effectively.”

He added: “To determine the most effective interventions, we need to find out more about people’s different experiences of moving through academic careers. We need to find out more about the reasons why Black researchers are underrepresented in more senior academic positions and how we can address them.”

Research culture drive

Wellcome has been at the forefront of a sector-wide drive to improve research culture. Last year, the funder made a commitment to dedicate funding to support racially marginalised researchers at a certain career stage as part of wider plans to address under-representation in grant funding.

On 9 February, the funder said it had decided to focus on early career Black researchers for the dedicated funding as it recognises that “researchers from different backgrounds face different and specific barriers or challenges”.

Wellcome has called for UK-based researchers who identify as being from a Black heritage background, including a mixed heritage background, to answer the survey, which is open until 12 March, and to participate in focus groups.

Although the funding will be aimed at early career researchers, Wellcome said it wants to hear the perspectives of researchers at all career stages, including those who are already established in their career or those who have left the field, to help inform the design of the funding.

The funder said it would also take inspiration from other organisations providing similar funding opportunities, as well as speak to organisations and groups that already support or represent marginalised researchers.

Wellcome said it would share the findings of the survey and focus groups, with responses being anonymised, in order to “help inform the wider research and funding sectors”.

The post Wellcome explores funding scheme for Black researchers appeared first on Research Professional News.

Bath mathematician takes on role at Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

The Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council has appointed University of Bath applied mathematics professor Jonathan Dawes as its deputy executive chair.

Dawes (pictured), who was co-founder and director from 2015 to 2020 of Bath’s Institute for Mathematical Innovation, said he was “particularly looking forward to working with the community to develop our research ecosystem” and responding to the strategic themes of UK Research and Innovation, the national funder under which the EPSRC sits. 

“I’m keen to see how we can build on our current success in order to realise the vision for engineering and physical sciences as part of UKRI.”

Prior to his appointment at Bath, Dawes held posts at Trinity and Newnham Colleges at the University of Cambridge.

He was also a member and then chair of the EPSRC’s strategic advisory team for mathematical sciences from 2018 to 2021 and was a member of the council’s Strategic Advisory Network from 2021 to 2023.

EPSRC executive chair Lynn Gladden said that Dawes’s “wide-ranging experience, including in leading cross-discipline collaborations and working with a broad range of partners, will be an important asset to the EPSRC and the wider engineering and physical sciences community”.

The post EPSRC appoints Jonathan Dawes as deputy executive chair appeared first on Research Professional News.

Government aims to “encourage ambitious, innovative research” and to attract “vital investment”

The UK government has launched what it says is the country’s “first ever” medical technology strategy, with the aim of “accelerating access to innovative technologies” on which the NHS currently spends about £10 billion per year.

“Building on learnings from the Covid-19 pandemic and the rapid development of medical technologies during that time, such as lateral flow tests and ventilators, this strategy will ensure the right product is available at the right price and in the right place,” the government said on 3 February.

“As a result, patients will continue to have access to high-quality care, alongside improved patient safety and health outcomes.”

The strategy builds on the government’s Life Sciences Vision and aims to “encourage ambitious, innovative research to secure the UK’s position as a global science superpower and attract vital investment for the UK economy, and create jobs across the country”.

The government said about 60 UK research programmes supported innovative technologies in 2021, representing more than £1bn of funding.

The strategy also looks at issues such as value for money, using data on the effectiveness of new technology, and the resilience of supply chains.

An implementation plan to deliver on the strategy is expected to be published later this year.

“The UK’s innovative spirit delivered revolutionary technology during the pandemic—from Covid tests [to] ventilators—and we want to harness this in promoting cutting-edge medical advancements to improve patient care,” said health minister Will Quince. 

“This new medtech strategy will help build a sustainable NHS with patients at the centre so people can continue to access the right care at the right time.”

The post UK publishes its ‘first ever’ medtech strategy appeared first on Research Professional News.

UK Industrial Fusion Solutions set up as “vehicle for industrial development and deployment” of technology

UK science minister George Freeman has announced the creation of a new delivery body for the UK’s nuclear-fusion energy programme, named UK Industrial Fusion Solutions Ltd.

“The UK is the world-leader in fusion science and technology, and now we are moving to turn fusion from cutting-edge science into a billion-pound clean-energy industry to create thousands of UK jobs across the UK,” said Freeman on 6 February.

He added that the new body would be “the vehicle for industrial development and deployment of this technology as a new clean-energy source in the coming decades”. It is expected to be formed over the next 18 months.

The government sees fusion as “a burgeoning industry in which the UK is already a world-leader” and which has “the potential to not only power the world but deliver vast economic growth across the country”.

The government said a new facility, the Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production plant, would be constructed by 2040 to demonstrate the ability to use fusion energy to generate electricity for the UK.

Ian Chapman, chief executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority, said the new delivery body “will be established as a programme-delivery organisation, driving performance and pace, and engaging industry in this endeavour”.

According to the government, “the new organisation will be a company limited by shares, established to work together with industry to deliver the prototype plant by 2040”. It added that recruitment for the chair of UKIFS would be launching “soon”.

The post UK gets new delivery body for fusion energy appeared first on Research Professional News.

But it will create “an opportunity” to remedy UK’s inability to stimulate innovation, says expert

The formation of a new government science department, announced today, “will not solve” the UK’s inability to stimulate innovation, but it will create an “opportunity” to do so, a policy expert has told peers.

Graeme Reid, a professor of science and research policy at UCL, said boosting the political profile of research and innovation would “help”, but only if it was followed by “stronger relationships” between the various elements of government that affect R&D.

His comments came as prime minister Rishi Sunak announced earlier today the creation of a standalone science, innovation and technology department, as part of a wider shake-up of government ministries.

Reid said that “giving more political profile to research and innovation will help if that profile is followed by stronger relationships between the different bits of government that often tackle these challenges”.

He was speaking at a House of Lords Science and Technology Committee hearing on delivering a UK science and technology strategy.

Commenting on the UK’s long-standing problems in translating research into innovation that would benefit the economy, Reid said: “A new department won’t solve these problems, but a new department might create an opportunity to solve them.”

While Reid said the UK fared reasonably well in its innovation capabilities compared with other countries, the impact of innovation on daily life was “missing”.

He added: “I look at the performance of our economy and I look at some of our societal challenges, and say how come we have such a high-performing research base and have such trouble resolving some of the difficulties that we face in life?”

Reid said that it was unclear whether this was a distinctive weakness in the UK or a global challenge.

He told peers that one of the “obstacles” to progress for R&D was coordination between the various government departments and bodies with an interest in research and innovation.

“Progress cannot be made by one government department alone,” he said.

Reid pointed out that the Home Office has a role to play in expanding the scale of research and innovation, as the UK needs to attract talent from across the world. Meanwhile, the Foreign Office is responsible for Official Development Assistance, which provides international R&D funding, and HMRC is in charge of R&D tax credits.

It is important to have “administrative machinery in government that can pool together these interests and debate the inevitable and proper tensions that exist within government,” Reid said.

The post New science department alone ‘won’t solve R&D problems’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Duncan Wingham to step down from Natural Environment Research Council after 11 years

A third UK research council could soon be without a long-term leader, as national funder UK Research and Innovation recruits a new executive chair for the Natural Environment Research Council.

Duncan Wingham will step down from his role at the end of June, UKRI confirmed, having led Nerc since 2012.

Wingham told Research Professional News he is “thinking about options” after leaving the research council.

Both the Economic and Social Research Council and the Medical Research Council are currently also without long-term leadership, having had interim executive chairs in place since 2021.

Job ad

UKRI advertised for Wingham’s successor on 3 February. The role, the salary for which starts at £130,000, is for a fixed term of four to six years and the deadline for applications is 5 March.

Applicants are expected to be “an accomplished leader with demonstrable research expertise in environmental science”, and will be responsible for “setting and delivering the strategic vision for Nerc, and contributing to the wider direction and activities of UKRI”.

With a total budget of £925 million over three financial years, Nerc’s annual budget is increasing from £288m in 2022-23 to £325m in 2024-25. The research council has promised to increase its discovery-science portfolio to £64m over this period.

Wingham’s CV

Before joining Nerc, Wingham was head of the department of earth sciences at UCL from 2005—a position in which he is still listed by the university.

He was founder and director of the Nerc Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, which discovered the widespread mass loss from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and its origin in accelerated ocean melting.

Wingham led Nerc through the founding of UKRI in 2018, when the seven research councils were brought together under one structure.

In 2022, he said that UKRI had been “really effective at providing a single voice into government”, but that its proximity to government had meant that it attracted criticism.

The post Research council leadership depleted as third chief departs appeared first on Research Professional News.

Resignation from industry body comes after condemnation of Novo Nordisk over promotional drug campaign

Pinder Sahota has resigned as president of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry amid an ongoing investigation into his company Novo Nordisk for its allegedly “disguised” sponsorship of a promotional drug campaign.

Sahota (pictured) is general manager of the UK arm of Denmark-based global healthcare company Novo Nordisk, which has been investigated by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA).

The authority is a self-regulatory body that administers the ABPI Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry, independently of the ABPI, which found that Novo Nordisk breached the code over a sponsored webinar to help pharmacies set up weight-management services that focused on its own weight-loss medicine, Saxenda.

ABPI said on 4 February that Sahota had made the decision to resign as president to “avoid an ongoing process around a Novo Nordisk ABPI Code of Practice breach becoming a distraction from the vital work of the ABPI”.

“I fully respect Pinder’s decision to step down as ABPI president, which will in no way affect the ongoing case relating to Novo Nordisk,” said Richard Torbett, chief executive of the ABPI. “Any breach of the ABPI code is taken extremely seriously and it is essential that all regulatory actions are robust, fair and transparent.”

ABPI vice-president Susan Rienow, the country president of Pfizer, will temporarily take on the roles and responsibilities of the president until a replacement is chosen by the board.

Panel problems

An interim report from the PMCPA panel said Novo Nordisk “failed” to recognise that the content of the training focused on its own medicine and that its attendance at the webinars and follow-ups with delegates meant “it could not be considered an arm’s length sponsorship”.

It notes that the company appealed an initial ruling and that “the appeal board was very concerned that Novo Nordisk did not recognise that this was a large-scale Saxenda promotional campaign which Novo Nordisk knowingly paid for and which was disguised.”

The interim report also notes that ABPI board was “seriously concerned” about Novo Nordisk’s sponsorship of the training that promoted its drug, as well as a “perceived naivety and lack of accountability” from the company. An audit of the company is now being undertaken.

A Novo Nordisk spokesperson said: “The intention of our actions was to educate healthcare professionals on weight management and the appropriate use of our medicine. However, we accept significant mistakes were made in relation to a sponsorship arrangement.”

They added that the company had “been assisting the PMCPA in support of the audit”.

“The Code of Practice process is ongoing, and following the recent audit, we intend to implement all recommendations to ensure that this cannot happen again” the spokesperson said. “We are committed to complying with the ABPI Code of Practice and to maintaining the highest possible ethical standards required by the pharmaceutical industry.”

The post ABPI president quits after his firm ‘breaches code of conduct’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Call comes as UK government releases £77 million fund to cut maritime emissions

The UK government is calling on universities to join forces and establish a new Clean Maritime Research Hub, with £7.4 million of public funding.

The government would like the hub to research the science behind clean maritime technologies and says it should “support skills development across the industry and generate knowledge for maritime decision-makers”.

The hub will be delivered in partnership with and co-funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the government said, and bring in additional funding from academia and industry.

It is part of the wider £206m UK Shore programme, launched in March 2022, to tackle shipping emissions and advance sustainable shipping.

The government today announced a £77m investment in clean maritime technology from UK Shore to “take the tech from the factory to the sea—identifying which projects will have a long-term impact in reducing emissions”.

The Zero Emission Vessels and Infrastructure competition is aimed at innovative companies, and will be overseen by Innovate UK.

“This multi-million-pound investment will help the latest tech ideas become reality and ensure UK waters will play host to green cargo ships, ferries and cruises in the next few years,” said transport secretary Mark Harper.

“Our funding will support a cleaner freight system, a more environmentally friendly tourism industry, and a net-zero maritime sector.”

The post Universities urged to form £7.4m Clean Maritime Research Hub appeared first on Research Professional News.

University of London project to “solve visibility issue” of “hard to find” infrastructure

A new initiative aims to map the arts and humanities research infrastructure, which is often “hard to find”, according to project leaders.

The University of London’s School of Advanced Study, which is leading the project, said research infrastructures—including well-established research centres based at university departments, and informal groups that cross disciplinary boundaries and learned societies—are “unconnected and difficult to discover”.

The project will seek to solve this “visibility issue”, it said.

“Despite having access to more information about research than ever before, research networks, centres, hubs or clusters of activity in the arts and humanities can be hard to find,” said Jo Fox, dean of the school and chair of the project.

“Our new map will provide a consolidated source of information that will help us all to find and connect with research activity more easily and boost visibility for research infrastructure across the country.”

The project, which launched on 6 February, is also set to produce an interactive tool to allow researchers to connect with others outside of their existing networks.

According to the School of Advanced Study—which is the national centre for supporting humanities research—the map will also allow policymakers to locate expertise and non-academic organisations to identify academic partners.

The project is funded by Research England and the Arts and Humanities Council, which will use the map to identify where further support is needed in the research-infrastructure landscape.

“This project will provide a comprehensive picture, for the first time, of what and where [research infrastructure] are, helping us to better support excellence, make new connections and maximise the impact, reach and recognition of the arts and humanities,” said Jaideep Gupte, director of research, strategy and innovation at AHRC.

The post UK arts and humanities R&D infrastructure to be mapped appeared first on Research Professional News.

Almost 19,000 businesses set up from UK universities in 2020-21 academic year

The number of startups, spinouts and social enterprises emerging from UK universities in on the rise, a report has found.

In the 2020-21 academic year, nearly 19,000 businesses were set up from universities, which is up by almost 2,000 on the previous year, according to a report by the vice chancellor’s group Universities UK.

The sharpest rise is in graduate startups, which went from around 13,900 in 2019-20 to 15,800 in 2020-21.

It revealed that £7 billion of external investment was attracted by businesses emerging from universities in 2020-21, while the estimated turnover of those businesses was £13 billion.

Public spending stimulates private spending

The report also found that investment in research and innovation delivers value for money as every £1 of public R&D spending stimulates between £1.96 and £2.34 of private spending.

“This report underlines the clear role that university research and innovation can play in building an economy that delivers growth and opportunity for communities across the whole of the UK,” said Paul Boyle, vice-chancellor of Swansea University and chair of the Universities UK Research and Innovation Policy Network.

The report also found that universities in “every part of the UK” are supporting innovation through the creation of new businesses and partnering with other companies.

Golden triangle dominance

But there is still a clear ‘golden triangle’ when it comes to spinouts in 2020-21, with London producing the most per region at 305. The University of Cambridge produced 182 spinouts, the most of any UK university, while the University of Oxford secured second place with 168.

By comparison, the number of spinouts coming from the north-east is 62 while the East Midlands has 73.

The golden triangle divide is much less defined for startups produced by universities. The University of Wales Trinity Saint David topped the tables with 993, while Kingston University had 943.

London remained the region with the most startups at 3,830. While the University of Oxford had 154 and Cambridge had 200.

The post UK university startups and spinouts on the rise, report finds appeared first on Research Professional News.

George Freeman also floats idea of turning UK university labs into institutes with dedicated funding

The UK science minister George Freeman has suggested reforms could “unlock a golden era” of UK-based science and technology companies.

If the government can “get the right regime in place…I think we’re poised to unlock a sort of new golden era of science and technology companies floating in London” at the capital’s stock exchange, he said.

Speaking at an event held by the centre-right think tank Onward on 2 February, Freeman outlined his ambitions for the UK to become both a global science superpower and an innovation nation.

Those ambitions are underpinned by a rising public R&D budget, which the government hopes will increase private R&D investment in the UK.

But many UK-based science and technology companies end up being bought by foreign investors. “Unless we connect our city to our incredibly rich [science and technology] base…we’re just going to be the world’s incubator,” Freeman said.

For him, reformed regime would involve regulation, procurement and R&D tax incentives. The government could also set up a “pump-priming” model before a company is floated on the London Stock Exchange, whereby the state-owned British Business Bank shores up other investors.

Freeman also suggested creating “the world’s most prestigious science and technology investment analyst fellowship…in London”, which would be aimed at fund managers interested in science and technology.

Last week the chancellor Jeremy Hunt said the combination of City of London finance and the strength of university research make the government’s ambition to be a science and technology superpower “achievable”. Hunt will next be setting out his spending plans in March.

Industrial R&D institutes

Freeman also wants to give centres of industrial R&D more public support. He highlighted the “extraordinary work” of the Whittle Laboratory, part of the University of Cambridge, which develops jet engine technology.

“Shouldn’t labs like that,” he asked, “have the sort of 5 to 10-year block funding and be able to grow into a more muscular institute?”

Freeman later told Research Professional News that he wanted more “outstanding labs like the Whittle [to] have the sort of funding freedoms of labs” like the University of Cambridge’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology that gets 5-year block funding from the Medical Research Council. MRC says such funding “helps give scientists the freedom to tackle difficult and fundamental problems in biology”.

Under the leadership of former prime minister Boris Johnson, No 10 previously considered a network of more government-backed independent research institutes. And they may possibly be recommended by Paul Nurse in his upcoming review of the UK’s R&D landscape.

The government would not comment on whether it had received Nurse’s review, but it confirmed the final report of the review will be published shortly.

Andy Neely, senior-pro-vice-chancellor for business and enterprise at the Whittle Laboratory, told Research Professional News that the laboratory is a “world leader in zero-carbon aviation and attracts significant amounts of industrial funding to support its mission to reach net zero”.

“It is an excellent example of how research that is strategically supported through public funding can attract significant industrial investment to accelerate solutions to global challenges like climate change,” Neely said.

“We would welcome further conversations with the government about creating an institute with long-term blocking funding to spearhead the UK’s ambition to be at the forefront of zero carbon aviation.”

‘Home office visa wall’

The science minister also highlighted problems with the UK’s research and innovation environment, saying changes are needed to achieve the ambition of being a science superpower.

Freeman said that, alongside attracting much more industrial R&D, the UK needs to increase researcher mobility—in words that came across as a veiled criticism of the current visa regime.

“We’ve got to build global talent paths so our best can go internationally, and the best internationally can come here, not try and do this behind a Home Office visa wall,” he said.

Despite post-Brexit changes to open more visa routes for researchers to enter the UK, concerns have been raised about costs and red tape.

Bureaucracy vs boldness

The UK’s current research funding system is “very bureaucratic”, Freeman said, particularly for early career scientists, which could affect the retention of top researchers.

“There is a problem…across our research ecosystem. We’re not creating enough free space for people to do really bold science.”

He highlighted the benefits of 10-year fellowships available in Germany and hinted that the UK could launch a similar programme if the money reserved for joining the EU’s Horizon Europe R&D programme is instead spent domestically.

“Those big flagship fellowships are completely key and that’s why in the Horizon plan B I’ve put fellowships at the heart of it, because we need to significantly improve that.”

Additional reporting by Mico Tatalovic

The post Science minister says reforms could ‘unlock golden era’ of R&D appeared first on Research Professional News.

Senior figures say removal of dedicated funding stream puts clinical researchers at a disadvantage

Research leaders have expressed concern over the removal of grant schemes for clinical researchers by health-research funder Wellcome, with one expert saying the move has left a “gap” in UK research funding that is “starting to hurt”.

The concerns follow recent warnings from the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee about an “alarming” decline in the clinical academic workforce.

The Wellcome issue stems from a shake-up in 2021, when the UK-based charity made major changes to its grant schemes as part of a new strategy that simplified the funding it offers.

These changes included combining separate grants it previously offered to clinical and non-clinical scientists under a single ‘discovery research’ scheme.

Dropping separate grants for clinical researchers has meant that Wellcome “has lost the explicit commitment to supporting people through a lifetime of clinical science careers in the UK, as they used to do to great effect”, said Stephen O’Rahilly, co-director of the Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science at the University of Cambridge.

“It’s just a puzzle to me why that wasn’t continued,” O’Rahilly told Research Professional News.

Competitive disadvantage

Along with six members of his institute, O’Rahilly had previously held a Wellcome-funded senior clinical research fellowship, but he said there is no equivalent under Wellcome’s new system.

Wellcome now offers awards for early career, mid-career and established researchers from any discipline including clinical sciences, but O’Rahilly said that clinical researchers will be less experienced compared with scientists from other fields due to time spent on medical training.

“The chances of them being competitive with basic scientists are far less,” O’Rahilly said.

“I’d be delighted if I was proved to be wrong, but I’ve heard some expressions of concern about the number of clinician scientists applying to [Wellcome] for these mid-career awards.”

Wellcome ‘remains committed’

Wellcome director Jeremy Farrar said on social media that Wellcome “remains committed to supporting clinicians and health professionals” and would monitor applications to its schemes from clinicians.

Michael Dunn, director of discovery research at Wellcome, told Research Professional News that the funder “warmly and enthusiastically” welcomes applications from clinicians.

“People on the frontline of healthcare have unparalleled insights into real-world research needs, and we’re eager to support them by funding imaginative research projects and including them in our decision-making,” Dunn said.

“We also know clinical careers can pose challenges for those wanting to carry out research and so we will continue to work with partners in the wider ecosystem to tackle some of these barriers.”

Funding gap

Wiebke Arlt, the newly appointed director of MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences at Imperial College London, also expressed concern that clinical researchers would have a “limited chance” of winning funding under Wellcome’s new system.

“You need the diversity in funding schemes to be able to supply diversity to the research environment,” Arlt said, adding that Wellcome’s change to its schemes “reveals a gap in funding that is now starting to hurt”.

In particular, Arlt said that funding for clinical researchers who were doing experimental medicine projects and human in vivo physiology studies is limited from other funders such as the Medical Research Council.

“We painfully feel that this capacity is not there anymore,” Arlt said.

An MRC spokesperson said that the funder supports clinical careers at all stages through its grants including the “MRC Clinician Scientist Fellowship, which is a scheme designed to support talented, clinically active healthcare professionals [to] make the transition to independent investigator”.

The next round of the MRC scheme, which offers funding for up to five years, will open on 10 February, it added.

A version of this article appeared in Research Fortnight

The post Wellcome shake-up leaves ‘gap’ in funding that is ‘starting to hurt’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Nation risks becoming “small science powerhouse rather than a global science superpower”, says George Freeman

Science minister George Freeman has said the UK is not a science superpower and warned the country will not become one until it is also an ‘innovation nation’.

During an event by think tank Onward on 2 February, Freeman called the UK a scientific “powerhouse” that wins awards and produces world-class science.

But the country risks remaining a “small science powerhouse rather than a global science superpower”, he said, unless it makes strategic changes in leveraging industry investment into science, technology and engineering.

He said the UK needs to attract more industrial R&D and “strategically shift” to becoming a place that “feels like a science, technology, research and innovation economy” instead of a service-based economy.

“We are not a science superpower yet,” Freeman said, adding that “we won’t be one unless we are also an innovation nation.”

“I think the industrial money really does matter and if we take our eye off that ball, we will end up being a small science powerhouse rather than a global science superpower.”

Government communications have so far variously cited unleashing, cementing, strengthening and restoring the UK’s position as a science superpower.

Science superpower checklist

According to Freeman, the UK must do five things to become a science superpower:

• Have world-class science, which Freeman said it does already.
• Have global impact by identifying and solving problems, such as preventing the ice caps from melting or cleaning up the oceans.
• Build global talent paths so the country best can work internationally and attract the best talent from around the world.
• Attract more industrial R&D.
• Defend the values of great international science, which includes having respect for free thinking.

Freeman went on to describe the importance of ongoing mapping of R&D clusters around the country, which he thinks will help drive private investment into UK science.

“If we can get the 30 clusters all around the country to grow,” he said, “then we’ll be seen internationally…as an innovation nation…somewhere everyone wants to invest.”

A version of this article appeared in Research Fortnight

The post ‘We’re not a science superpower,’ admits UK science minister appeared first on Research Professional News.

UK prime minister has brought “stability” for R&D but concern grows over tax credit reforms

Rishi Sunak has brought much-needed “predictability and stability” to R&D policy, but he risks undermining the government’s ‘science superpower’ vision with issues such as R&D tax credit cuts, experts have said, as the prime minister completes his first 100 days in office.

Sunak’s appointment on 25 October followed a turbulent period in UK politics that saw his predecessor Liz Truss ousted after just seven weeks and the economy reeling from her chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s disastrous ‘mini-budget’.

For many in the R&D sector, Sunak’s entry into 10 Downing Street brought relief.

“Compared to the carnage of the short-lived Truss-Kwarteng experiment, Sunak as prime minister at least brought some welcome predictability and stability to research and innovation policy, as indeed for many areas of policy,” James Wilsdon, a professor of research policy at University College London, told Research Professional News.

“We already knew what his position was from when he was standing to become prime minister, and based on commitments he made while chancellor. In that sense, a more predictable hand on the tiller was welcome.”

One of Sunak’s first positive moves was to establish himself as chair of the National Science and Technology Council, which provides cross-government coordination on R&D issues. This came after Truss had controversially scrapped the committee, before reviving it as a committee chaired by the chancellor rather than the prime minister.

And in November, Kwarteng’s successor Jeremy Hunt provided some much-needed reassurance for the R&D sector in his autumn statement when he announced a ringfencing of the £20 billion promised for R&D by 2024-25—at a time when budgets were being tightened and inflation was increasing.

Protecting the R&D budget showed that “Sunak and the chancellor were serious about supporting science, even when times got tough”, said Matthew Burnett, head of science and technology at the centre-right think tank Onward.

£22bn target missing

However, the sharp-eyed in the sector also noticed that there was no mention of the government’s previous target to spend £22bn of public money on R&D by 2026-27.

Wilsdon fears the omission could be a symptom of a decrease in the “scale of ambition” that was trumpeted by Boris Johnson’s government and entourage—including his former adviser Dominic Cummings, then a key driving force for R&D policy.

This, Wilsdon believes, has not been helped by the Office for National Statistics’ recent change in methodology to measure business R&D investment, which suggests the UK may have already met its target to increase investment to 2.4 per cent of GDP by 2027.

“We’re not hearing anything now about the £22bn target,” he said, “and the ONS’s recalibrated budgets have taken a fair bit of the urgency out of the broader 2.4 per cent debate.”

Meanwhile, he added, “the wider spending climate means we no longer seem to be in a period where budgets are set to grow at a dizzying pace. When you adjust for inflation and other factors, the increases we are actually going to see are less transformative than [those promised by] the rhetoric of the Johnson period.”

R&D tax credit reforms

There was further concern when Hunt’s autumn statement announced a cut to the deduction rate for small and medium-sized enterprises claiming R&D tax credits—a move aimed at tackling abuse and fraud in the system. Meanwhile, support for the R&D Expenditure Credit—targeted at larger businesses—is set to increase.

“The R&D tax credit announcements were a mixed bag,” observed Burnett. “They provided a more generous scheme for large businesses, but the small business scheme became significantly less so without fixing the structural problems causing the inefficiencies in the scheme.”

This, he added, “has been a big shock to startups, as the lower rate comes into force this April”.

For Martin Turner, head of policy and public affairs at the BioIndustry Association, a trade organisation representing over 400 firms, the cut to the scheme for small businesses is at odds with Sunak’s promise to put “innovation at the heart of everything we do” and to “make sure the UK is the most innovative economy in the word”—as outlined in the prime minister’s new year’s speech.

“Sunak’s focus on driving economic growth by nurturing innovation is absolutely right, but the government made a massive misstep at the autumn statement when it cut the small business R&D tax credit,” he said. “It has dented the confidence of global investors in the UK’s ‘science superpower’ ambitions.”

However, there is now some hope that the government will revise its plans for R&D tax credits, after Hunt recently confirmed that he was considering “further support” for innovative small businesses following the backlash.

“It’s a chink of light to see that the government recognises the R&D tax relief reform creates challenges for innovative small firms and accepts the merit in the case for further support—let us hope the luddites will not succeed in the end,” said Martin McTague, national chair of the Federation of Small Businesses.

UK Silicon Valley

R&D tax credits aside, Sunak has won plaudits from industry for his support for innovation.

In his new year’s address, the prime minister promised to make the UK a “beacon of science, technology and enterprise” as he confirmed plans to increase the country’s R&D budget.

In a speech delivered later in January, his business secretary Grant Shapps echoed this rhetoric as he set out plans to create a “Silicon Valley with a British edge”.

And in the autumn statement, Hunt said he had tasked chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance with advising on how the UK can “better regulate emerging technologies” in five sectors—digital technology, green industries, life sciences, advanced manufacturing and the creative industries—in order to create “the 21st century’s Silicon Valleys in the UK”.

Joe Marshall, chief executive of the National Centre for Universities and Business, welcomes the prime minister’s continued emphasis on science and innovation, which he believes is “at the centre of [Sunak’s] economic vision”.

“He has also instigated a re-emergence of industrial strategy-type thinking around life sciences, green tech and digital industries, and is aiming for the UK to be ‘the next Silicon Valley’ by bringing our finance and science strengths together,” he said.

Marshall, however, thinks there are concerns in industry and universities about the UK’s ability to “attract and retain the skilled people needed to make Sunak’s economic vision a reality”.

“The government needs a credible plan for meeting this significant challenge. There is also uncertainty,” he said.

Horizon Europe woes

One area in which Sunak has arguably made little progress is UK association to Horizon Europe, the EU’s €95.5bn (£85bn) R&D scheme.

Participation in the scheme has been held up for two years because of wider political disagreements between the two sides over the Northern Ireland protocol. The dispute has left UK winners unable to draw on the EU funding awarded to them, although the UK government has promised an ambitious replacement.

This uncertainty “puts longstanding research activities and collaborations at risk”, said Marshall.

But a resolution may now be in sight, with recent reports of a “major breakthrough”.

“Reports in recent days suggest the government is on the cusp of achieving a resolution of the Irish border question. Managing to salvage association to Horizon in the wake of that would be hugely welcomed by the research community,” said Wilsdon.

Government response

In response to the sector comments, Sunak’s government has defended its approach to R&D.

A government spokesperson said: “The government recognises the hugely important role that R&D and innovation play for the economy and society.”

They added that the recommitment to investing £20bn a year in R&D by 2024-25 amounted to a cash increase of 30 per cent from 2021-22 levels—“the highest level of R&D this country has ever seen”.

“Our ongoing R&D tax reliefs review will ensure taxpayer’s money is spent as effectively as possible while improving the competitiveness of the R&D Expenditure Credit scheme, as well as taking a step towards a simplified, single R&D Expenditure Credit-like scheme for all,” they continued.

“The government will work with industry over the coming months to understand whether further support is necessary for R&D-intensive small and medium-sized enterprises.”

It might be too soon to tell what Sunak’s R&D legacy will be. But we can likely expect plenty more turbulence for the sector ahead.

A version of this article appeared in Research Fortnight

The post Sunak’s first 100 days: mixed review from R&D sector appeared first on Research Professional News.

Science advocacy group Case releases recommendations to help make R&D “relevant” to the public

An advocacy group has released a report on the lessons learned from previous science campaigns, with recommendations for future efforts.

As part of a wider project to make R&D feel more “relevant” to the public, the Campaign for Science and Engineering released a report on 31 January looking at six past campaigns to identify best practice.

Ben Bleasdale, director of the wider Case project Discovery Decade, said: “If our sector can’t make its case clearly and passionately then how can we expect the public, or ministers, to put R&D on the priority list?

“To build a stronger public identity for R&D, those advocating for R&D must work together. This report highlights just how much we can learn from each other’s campaigning work, including understanding our audience, honing our messages and being savvy with our delivery.”

Recommendations

The report, authored by Case advocacy and engagement officer Rebecca Hill, looked at the following campaigns: Science—So What? So Everything—from the Labour government in 2009; Science is Vital from a grassroots academic coalition in 2010; Made at Uni from Universities UK in 2018; Research at Risk from a group of medical research charities in 2020; Social Sciences, Humanities and the Arts for People and the Economy from the British Academy and others in 2020; and 101 Jobs that Change the World from national funder UK Research and Innovation in 2021.

For each, Hill assessed the aims, audiences, tactics, successes, challenges and lessons learned.

The recommendations are:

• Understand the target audience and be careful not to “drift away” from the underlying audience research as the campaign evolves.
• Have straightforward messaging and be “brutal and bold” when defining key goals.
• Choose messages that are meaningful to the audience, as the idea that R&D is abstract and irrelevant needs to be tackled.
• Bring together different partners, especially if they are unexpected ones, as this can help gain traction with new public audiences.
• Make effective use of financial resources by knowing when to hire help and when to focus in-house.
• Use and balance time and capacity wisely.

Case represents over 100 member organisations including learned societies, universities, research institutes, funders and R&D companies.

The post Hone your message and be savvy, says R&D advocacy report appeared first on Research Professional News.

Tech Nation announces closure and urges government to match technology superpower ambitions with policies

A government-backed organisation that fosters tech businesses has announced it is closing down after the government pulled its funding.

Tech Nation announced this week that it would close its doors on 31 March after the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport decided to award its core grant to a business incubator run by Barclays Bank.

Founded by the coalition government in 2010, Tech Nation has run accelerator programmes for startup and scale-up companies in the tech sector, as well as processing applications for the UK’s Global Talent visa from tech workers on behalf of the Home Office.

Gerard Grech, founding chief executive of Tech Nation, said: “We have helped champion and support innovators in everything from artificial intelligence to fintech to climate tech and more. In doing so, we have helped spread digital growth and jobs nationwide.”

The organisation said that without core government funding, “Tech Nation’s remaining activities are not viable on a stand-alone basis” and it would be ceasing all existing operations.

“The Home Office has been notified of Tech Nation’s plans to cease operations and our visa programme will continue in the immediate term,” the organisation said.

Tech momentum under threat

Having supported the development of household names such as Monzo, Ocado and Deliveroo, Tech Nation warned that current economic trends “threaten Britain’s tech momentum”.

“The government has announced ambitions to be a science and technology superpower,” the organisation said, adding that “it is vital that government rhetoric is now paired with policies and support mechanisms to match”.

Last week, chancellor Jeremy Hunt said he wanted to attract tech investment into the UK. “I want the world’s tech entrepreneurs, life science innovators and green tech companies to come to the UK because it offers the best possible place to make their visions happen,” he said.

A spokesperson for the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said: “We have supported Tech Nation since 2017 to accelerate the growth of startups and scale-ups across the UK.

“Our decision to make the Digital Growth Grant competitive brings the funding into line with the majority of government grants. Barclays Eagle Labs was successful because their application represented the best value for taxpayers’ money, will benefit the most startups and scale-ups over the next two years, and was scored highest by an independent panel.

“We are committed to supporting Tech Nation until March 2023.”

The post UK government pulls funding of tech sector incubator appeared first on Research Professional News.

One thousand university roles at risk in Wales alone as dozens of projects face closure

Universities across the UK fear scores of research projects could close this year due to the end of EU funding, with 1,000 jobs on the line in Wales alone.

The last tranche of EU funding to support economic development will end in the UK later this year, with the government promising to make up the loss via its £2.6 billion UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF). 

But universities say delays in the rollout of the fund, coupled with lower levels of investment and uncertainties regarding the distribution of the money, mean numerous projects are facing abrupt closure.

Wales is likely to be hit particularly hard, with some 60 projects due to end and 1,000 jobs at risk, according to analysis that vice-chancellors’ group Universities Wales shared with Research Professional News.

“Around 240 jobs at our institution are going to be affected, and the majority of those staff will lose their jobs when these projects come to an end,” said Swansea University vice-chancellor Paul Boyle. “We’re on the cliff edge now.”

At Newcastle University, structural funding for four projects is due to come to an end this year—including work to link local businesses with the university’s expertise and resources.

“Universities are now going through a period of huge uncertainty,” said Martin Cox, director of business develop-ment and enterprise at the university. “And lots of staff who are delivering important innovation programmes face an uncertain future or have already been issued with redundancy notices.” 

At Sheffield Hallam University, structural funding for four large projects employing 40 staff is set to end this year. 

“Much of this work has been targeted at supporting [small and medium-sized enterprises] and the reason for that is a large part of the regional economy in South Yorkshire depends on the SME base,” said Rory Duncan, pro-vice-chancellor for research and innovation at Sheffield Hallam University.

Labour’s shadow science minister Chi Onwurah said she fears for regions outside the ‘golden triangle’ for research.

“The potential loss of jobs in these regions will be devastating to areas that are already left out of the government’s science and R&D spending,” she said.

“We do not know the exact R&D breakdown [of UKSPF], but on average, compared with average annual [EU] funds, there will be at least a 43 per cent cut, harming regions that were already in desperate need of investment.”

To allow EU-funded projects to continue, vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK is calling for £170 million in immediate ‘bridging funding’. 

The news comes ahead of the March budget, and as the government champions the importance of innovation and entrepreneurship to grow the ailing economy.

The UK government said: “We recognise the vital role universities play in local growth, which is why we are encouraging them to engage with councils to secure UKSPF funding. Councils are working closely with partners, including universities, to deliver UKSPF in their areas.”

This article also appeared in Research Fortnight

The post Fears for research jobs as EU funding ends appeared first on Research Professional News.