RCUK RESPONSE TO THE HOUSE OF LORDS INQUIRY: SETTING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH FUNDING PRIORITIES

RCUK RESPONSE TO THE HOUSE OF LORDS INQUIRY: SETTING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH FUNDING PRIORITIES Summary of Key Points RCUK s objective is to support excellent science and research, providing the UK with knowledge and highly trained individuals to drive and safeguard the long term prosperity, health and sustainability of the UK. RCUK fully supports the Haldane principle which we see as having a fundamental role in ensuring the independence of the Research Councils and their funding, and we believe it is being upheld. It enables Research Councils and researchers to provide independent advice to Government to support policy-making, which builds and maintains public confidence in this process. The Government has responsibility for setting the over-arching strategy and framework for the research base. Within this framework, Research Councils develop their own strategies and priorities through a strong consultative process, involving leading academic researchers and representatives from industry and the public sector recognised for their knowledge of the field. All research supported by Research Councils is selected on the basis of research excellence and assessed through detailed peer review. The area of research and the ideas to be investigated are defined by researchers, either by submitting a proposal directly or by informing a Council's strategic priorities. Both approaches are often in collaboration with partners in other research groups, business, the third sector/ngos, or the public sector. Research Council funding is balanced between supporting and encouraging multidisciplinary research in themes that address major global and societal challenges and safeguarding the health of the entire research base. Investigators are closely involved in developing these themes, and in both cases have considerable freedom and autonomy in putting forward the objectives and scope of their research, and also in modifying the research as it progresses to meet new opportunities. Significant evidence shows that both streams attract the best researchers and have international impact. The 10 year Science and Innovation Investment Framework and the continued commitment to this vision have been extraordinarily beneficial to the UK research base. We need to ensure that we maintain investment and confidence in research. This is increasingly important as other nations are enhancing their investment in research. The Research Councils engage directly with other funders and users of research to ensure both strategic alignment and collaboration where appropriate. The range of mechanisms employed is diverse and includes sector-specific funding partnerships (for example working closely with major charities), involving research users in strategy development, working closely with the Technology Strategy Board, and co-funding large research investments. The Research Councils continually re-focus and refresh their strategies to respond to the grand challenges facing society. Regardless of any pre-conceived focus, we are already funding research in many areas of economic and social importance, delivering impact in its widest sense and have done so for decades. 1

Introduction 1. The seven UK Research Councils are the largest public funders of research in the UK, investing over 3 billion per annum in research, training and knowledge transfer across a broad spectrum of research areas. The seven Research Councils are: Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Medical Research Council (MRC) Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) 2. Research Councils have common objectives, which are to: fund the highest quality internationally competitive research; support postgraduate training; advance knowledge and technology, and provide trained researchers and services which meet the needs of users and beneficiaries, thereby contributing to the economic competitiveness of the UK, the effectiveness of public services and policy, health and the quality of life; support public engagement with research. 3. Each Council is an independent Non-Departmental Public Body established by Royal Charter and sponsored by the Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills (BIS). The Councils are funded by BIS with an allocation from the Science Budget. Details of the funding provided for the present Spending Review period (2008-11) are available in the Science Budget Allocations published by BIS. 1 4. Each Research Council has a governing Council which acts as a senior decision making body, with members drawn from the Council s academic, business and user communities. This body is responsible for setting Research Council policy, strategy and priorities. It is also accountable for the stewardship of the Research Council s budget and the extent to which objectives have been delivered and targets have been met. 5. Each Council is supported by its own structure of high-level advisory boards and groups to identify and prioritise opportunities for research, training and knowledge transfer and to provide external advice on the development of strategies and policies. 6. Research Councils UK (RCUK) is a strategic partnership set up to champion the research, training and knowledge transfer supported by the seven UK Research Councils. RCUK was established in 2002 to enable the Councils to work together more effectively to enhance the overall impact and effectiveness of their research, training and innovation activities, contributing to the delivery of the Government s objectives for science and innovation. Further details are available at www.rcuk.ac.uk. 7. In this response science and engineering has been interpreted to include all aspects of research, including the physical, biological, engineering, biomedical, natural and social 1 See www.dius.gov.uk/~/media/publications/u/urn07114 2

science disciplines, and the arts and humanities. RCUK considers that the whole research spectrum, including the arts and humanities, is relevant to this inquiry. Q1. What is the overall objective of publicly-funded science and technology research? 8. RCUK s objective is to support excellent science and research, providing the UK with knowledge and highly trained individuals to drive and safeguard the long term prosperity, health and sustainability of the UK. Q2. How are public funds for science and technology research allocated? Who is involved at each level and what principles apply? Where appropriate, is the Haldane Principle being upheld? 9. RCUK fully supports the Haldane principle which we see as having a fundamental role in ensuring the independence of the Research Councils and their funding, and we believe it is being upheld. It enables the Research Councils and researchers to provide independent advice to Government to support policy-making, which builds and maintains public confidence in this process. 10. The Government has responsibility for setting the over-arching strategy and framework for the research base. Within this framework, Research Councils develop their own strategies and priorities through a strong consultative process, involving leading academic researchers and representatives from industry and the public sector recognised for their knowledge of the field. 11. All research supported by Research Councils is selected on the basis of research excellence and assessed through detailed peer review. The area of research and the ideas to be investigated are defined by researchers, either by submitting a proposal directly or by informing a Council's strategic priorities. Both approaches are often in collaboration with partners in other research groups, business, the third sector/ngos, or the public sector. 12. Research Council funding is balanced between supporting and encouraging multidisciplinary research in themes that address major global and societal challenges and safeguarding the health of the entire research base. Investigators are closely involved in developing these themes, and in both cases have considerable freedom and autonomy in putting forward the objectives and scope of their research, and also in modifying the research as it progresses to meet new opportunities. 13. An overview of the peer review process is provided in Figure 1. An overview of strategy development and the setting of research priorities is provided in Figure 2. These diagrams provide a general overview of both processes and there may be minor variations between Councils. It should be noted that categories in the diagrams are not mutually exclusive - for example, industrialists are represented on advisory panels, and some Council members are also members of Learned Societies. 14. Examples of Peer Review Panels include AHRC s Medieval and Modern History Committee, MRC s Molecular and Cellular Medicine Board and STFC s Astronomy Grants Panel. Examples of Advisory Boards include BBSRC s Strategy Board, EPSRC s Technical Opportunities Panel, ESRC s Strategic Research Board, and NERC s Science and Innovation Strategy Board. 3

Proposal Prepared and Submitted Applicant Response to Referees 1 If Successful 2 Grant Awarded Proposal Refereed Peer Review Panel Asessment Grant Final Report & Assessment 52,472 Research Active People 3 ~2500 People on Peer Review Panels 4 Figure 1. Overview of the Peer Review Process. Notes: 1) This step is sometimes omitted in small grants schemes; 2) After rank-ordering of proposals the top percentage are funded based on the available budget; 3) Number of full-time equivalent research-active staff submitted to RAE 2008; 4) This is an approximate figure - some Councils have standing committees, whilst others form ad-hoc panels when required; for the latter, figures were based on the number of panels established over a selected year and the exact number will vary annually. Charities Foresight Research Council Staff Advice Strategic Plan Delivery Plan Industry HEIs Evaluations and Reviews Learned Societies Research Communities Synthesis of Options Advisory Panels (620 Members) 1 RC Councils (99 Members) 2 RCUK Executive Group (7 CEOs) Synthesis of Strategies Workshops Current Portfolio Government Departments & Agencies RCUK Priority Themes Figure 2. Overview of Strategy Development and the Setting of Research Priorities. Notes: 1) Figure includes panels involved in the development of strategy and does not include other sources of advice such as peer review panels; 2) Figure includes Research Council CEOs; 3) Only a selection of the stakeholders/inputs that feed into the synthesis of options are shown. 15. Under the dual support system, the Research Councils provide grants for specific projects and programmes within HEIs and Research Council institutes, as well as support for fellowships and large-scale partnership funding, while the UK s Funding Councils provide block grant funding to support research facilities and infrastructure. This funding system provides institutions with capacity to undertake research funded by the Research Councils and other sponsors such as the private sector, government departments, charities, the European Union 4

and other international bodies. It also provides funding for very speculative research which is at too early a stage for writing up in a proposal to the Research Councils. 16. There is strong Research Council engagement with the research base, government, business, the third sector and the public that informs our research priorities. This ensures Research Council funded research delivers benefit to society through economic and social impact. 17. The Research Councils play an active role in ensuring that public views have influenced and shaped their own research policies. Three recent and two current examples of where Research Councils have used public dialogue to identify and respond to concerns and aspirations around emerging research opportunities are as follows: Nanotechnology for Healthcare The findings from a public dialogue in nanotechnology were used alongside advice from the research and user community in the development of the scope of the nanotechnology for healthcare grand challenge call. Critical to its success was the use of independent facilitators to conduct the dialogue, and the involvement of academic researchers and EPSRC staff throughout the process. Ageing Results from the BBSRC/MRC public consultation on ageing research 2 have helped shape the cross-council initiative on Lifelong Health and Wellbeing, for example by ensuring that the initiative encompassed prevention research throughout life, an area identified as a priority by the public. In addition members of the MRC s Public Panel were involved in the review of applications to the Lifelong Health and Wellbeing initiative, ensuring that public concerns and priorities were reflected in decision-making. Stem Cell Dialogue The Stem Cell Dialogue project 3 was led by BBSRC and MRC and funded by the BIS Sciencewise initiative. The dialogue involved the largest ever public and stakeholder consultation on stem cells in the UK and included the scientific and medical communities, industry, ethics and religious groups. The findings were published in December 2008 and showed conditional support for all avenues of stem cell research, and identified issues around, for example, investment and coordination between public and private sectors, clinical trials, and communication of uncertainties. Synthetic Biology On behalf of the Research Councils, BBSRC and EPSRC are leading on a programme to develop effective public engagement around synthetic biology. A public dialogue, part-funded by Sciencewise, is expected to address topics such as regulatory, ethical and others social issues. Geoengineering With the support of the Royal Society, which launched the report Geoengineering the Climate 4 on 1 September 2009, NERC has applied for Sciencewise support to run a public dialogue exercise on the issues of public concern around different geoengineering options and the need for, and direction of, research in this area. EPRSC and ESRC will be engaged in this activity as well as the Royal Society and members of the engineering community. 2 See www.mrc.ac.uk/utilities/documentrecord/index.htm?d=mrc004678 3 See www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/stem-cell-dialogue/ 4 See royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=35110 5

Q3. Are existing objectives and mechanisms for the allocation of public funds for research appropriate? If not, what changes are necessary? 18. In general terms, RCUK considers that the objectives and mechanisms for the allocation of public funds are appropriate. The current arrangements whereby the science budget is ringfenced is particularly important for ensuring the long-term continuity of funding, and needs to be maintained. 19. There is however room for improvement in the following areas: Ensuring both arms of the dual support system reinforce each other, so that the capabilities offered by HEIs (such as infrastructure and skill sets) and the strategic goals of the Research Councils (such as interdisciplinarity, impact and public engagement) are aligned and encourage the appropriate behaviours at an individual, departmental and HEI level for the UK research system as a whole. Planning horizons: o The 10 year Science and Innovation Investment Framework and the continued commitment to this vision have been extraordinarily beneficial to the UK research base. Universities have had both the funding and confidence to invest in world leading infrastructure, such as the Manchester Interdisciplinary Biocentre, Warwick Digital Lab, and chemistry facilities at the University of Oxford. o We need to ensure that we maintain investment and confidence in research. This is increasingly important as other nations are enhancing their investment in research. 3- year cycles of funding are too short in all science areas. This has a particular impact on commitment to running costs of large scale capital investments, which are typically over periods of more than 15 years, and on long-term collaborations - for example our ability to bring long term funding to international collaborations with countries such as China, India and the US. It is important that the UK is able to articulate its priorities for research very clearly so we can shape the future research agenda in Europe, including future Framework Programmes, the European Research Council, and the European Research Area. The formation of the Technology Strategy Board, the Office for Strategic Coordination of Health Research (OSCHR) and the Energy Technologies Institute provides new opportunities for partnerships to ensure important research outcomes are exploited rapidly. Q4. What governs the allocation of funding for Government policy-directed research through Government departmental and agency initiatives? Are existing mechanisms appropriate? What is the role of Departmental Chief Scientific Advisers? 20. Research Councils are not involved directly with the setting of research priorities by government departments; however we do contribute to this process. Most Research Councils have direct links with government departments and provide input into policy development through a variety of mechanisms, including concordats, representation on advisory bodies, and collaborative funding, as well as secondments to government departments. Specific examples are provided at Annex A. 21. The following Chief Scientific Advisors (CSAs) are members of Councils and Advisory Boards: 6

Professor Bob Watson (Defra CSA) (BBSRC and NERC Council); Professor Dame Sally Davies (DoH CSA) (MRC Council); Professor Brian Collins (BIS, DfT and briefly DECC CSA) (EPSRC Technical Opportunities Panel); Professor Mark Welland (MoD CSA) (EPSRC Council); Professor Julia Slingo (Met Office Chief Scientist) (NERC Council). 22. Research Council involvement in bodies with a cross-departmental remit such as OSCHR also provide effective fora for interactions with Chief Scientists. OSCHR aims to facilitate more efficient translation of health research into health and economic benefits in the UK through better coordination of health research and coherent funding arrangements. The membership of the OSCHR board includes MRC s CEO Sir Leszek Borysiewicz, Professor Dame Sally Davies, Professor Sir John Savill (Chief Scientist for Scotland) and Professor Mike Harmer (Deputy Chief Medical Officer for Wales). 23. Government policies and allocations of funding for Government policy-directed research should be based on advice and evidence from a wide range of sources, including relevant stakeholders and the general public. Research Councils have access to experts across all research areas, and can provide a useful resource for Government in identifying whom to consult on policy issues. Consultations should be conducted at the outset to ensure they influence policy formulation at the very early stages. 24. Departmental CSAs can play a key role in helping to ensure evidence from research is used in formulating policies and in bringing people together to tackle key issues. The Core Issues Group (CIG), which includes the CSAs of government departments and the Chief Executives of the Research Councils, meets regularly to discuss issues of mutual interest. Q5. How are science and technology research priorities co-ordinated across Government, and between Government and the relevant funding organisations? Who is responsible for ensuring that research gaps to meet policy needs are filled? 25. Information on Research Council links with government departments is provided at Annex A. 26. The widespread appointment of CSAs has led to some improvements in terms of bringing people together to tackle key issues. Successful partnerships (in addition to CIG) include: The Research Base Funders Forum - allows governmental and non-governmental funders of public good research to consider the collective impact of their strategies on the sustainability, health and outputs on the Research Base. The Energy Research Partnership (ERP) - designed to give strategic direction to UK energy research, development, demonstration and deployment (RDD&D), in the context of the Government s Energy White Paper and its overall aim to increase the level, coherence and effectiveness of public-private investment in innovation and commercialisation to achieve energy policy goals. It brings together key public and private sector funders of UK energy RDD&D, to promote a coherent approach to addressing UK energy challenges, set within an international context, and increase long-term energy related activity and investments in the UK. The Environment Research Funders Forum (ERFF) - a co-ordinating mechanism initiated by NERC between all the public sector funders of environmental research. ERFF aims to improve the way environment research is prioritised, funded, informs policy and delivers 7

return on investment. ERFF has produced a research database which covers research funded by each of its members and is a searchable resource, used to identify any gaps and potential overlaps. The Living with Environmental Change (LWEC) partnership was developed through ERFF, and involves collaboration between 20 funders, including Research Councils, government departments and agencies. LWEC funds collaborative research in environmental change, ensuring effective science to policy processes. The Joint Climate Research Programme - a joint programme between NERC and the Met Office. The aim of the programme is to ensure that the UK maintains and strengthens its leading international position in climate science, and hence in climate forecasting and provision of advice for climate policy. The UK Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS) - brings together key UK funders and stakeholders who provide support for the development sciences research base. It provides a framework for a more coordinated approach to development sciences research, in order to increase its relevance and impact on national and international policies and activities, aimed at improving the lives of the world s poorest people. The UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) - established in 2004 with the aim of re-engineering the clinical research environment in the UK, to benefit the public and patients by improving national health and increasing national wealth. The partnership brings together the major stakeholders that influence clinical research in the UK. It includes the main UK research funding bodies; academia; the NHS; regulatory bodies; the bioscience, healthcare and pharmaceutical industries; and patients. The UKCRC represents a new way of working in which complex long-standing issues are tackled by key stakeholders working together. 27. There is still a lack of joined up governance for public sector R&D funding in the UK. The primary criterion for government department funded research, which is largely managed through commissioning, is strategic need rather than excellence as expressed through the peer review system. This can have an impact on the quality of the research, and potentially the impact that can be achieved for the benefit of the UK and more widely. Q6. Is the balance of Government funding for targeted versus response-mode research appropriate? What mechanisms are required to ensure that an appropriate and flexible balance is achieved? Should the funding of science and technology research be protected within the Research Councils or Government departments? How will the current economic climate change the way that funds are allocated in the future? 28. As highlighted in paragraph 11, all research supported by Research Councils is selected on the basis of research excellence and assessed through detailed peer review. The area of research and the ideas to be investigated are defined by researchers, either by submitting a proposal directly or by informing a Council's strategic priorities. A more important question is how to ensure the right balance of funding between supporting and encouraging multidisciplinary research around major themes and global challenges and supporting a healthy research base. Significant evidence shows that both streams attract the best researchers and have international impact: An independent study by Evidence Ltd 5 demonstrated that EPSRC s most successful researchers 6 do achieve consistently impressive results based on an international 5 Impact Profiles Study of EPSRC Researchers, Evidence Ltd, 2006 8

comparison of the citation impact of their publications. During 2008-09 this group amounted to around 1,200 principle investigators, and analysis shows that while 68% of them were working in single-discipline fields, an impressive 58% were working in areas defined as multidisciplinary. 25% held multiple grants spanning both single and multidisciplinary work. The NERC citations study 2008, 7 which was also an independent study by Evidence Ltd, evaluated the academic impact of NERC-funded ISI journal papers published between 2003 and 2005. It showed that whilst the rebased citations impact score for UK environmental sciences was 1.25 times world average, NERC-funded science achieved an impact score of 1.66. Within that, a comparison was made of the performances of the NERC funding modes in use at the time (responsive mode, fellowships, directed programmes and core strategic). It showed that responsive mode and directed programmes had comparable impact scores (1.93 and 1.84 respectively). Directed research included the highest proportion of most highly cited papers (those scoring > 8 times world average impact) and fellowships achieved the highest impact score of 2.03 times the world average. 29. Research Councils develop their funding priorities through a strong consultative process involving leading academic researchers and representatives from industry and the public sector recognised for their knowledge of the field, as highlighted in paragraph 10. Q7. How is publicly-funded science and technology research aligned and co-ordinated with nonpublicly funded research (for example, industrial and charitable research collaborations)? How can industry be encouraged to participate in research efforts seeking to answer societal needs? 30. The Research Councils engage directly with other funders and users of research to ensure both strategic alignment and collaboration where appropriate. The range of mechanisms employed is diverse and includes sector-specific funding partnerships (for example working closely with major charities), involving research users in strategy development, working closely with the Technology Strategy Board, and co-funding large research investments. Examples of these activities are provided at Annex B. Q8. To what extent should publicly-funded science and technology research be focused on areas of potential economic importance? How should these areas be identified? 31. It is important that consideration is given to both economic and social impact when considering research priorities. Research Councils recognise a wide range of potential impacts, including the impact of skilled people, technology and policy development, wealth creation, and health and quality of life improvements. 32. The Research Councils continually re-focus and refresh their strategies to respond to the grand challenges facing society. Regardless of any pre-conceived focus, we are already funding research in many areas of economic and social importance, delivering impact in its widest sense and have done so for decades. Examples include: The existing cross-council priority themes: Energy; Living with Environmental Change; Global Uncertainties: Security for all in a Changing World; Ageing: Lifelong Health and Wellbeing; Digital Economy; and Nanotechnology through engineering to application; 6 Most successful researchers in this context is defined as the approximately 35% of EPSRC-funded researchers who collectively win 80% of all EPSRC research funding. 7 See http://www.nerc.ac.uk/about/perform/documents/citations-study-2008.pdf 9

Food Security; Connected Communities. 33. RCUK is aiming to increase the economic impact of the research we fund over a range of timescales. In the short term we will focus on: accelerating the impact from our past investments in research, and maintaining momentum in the development of translational research in readiness for renewed venture capital investment in the economic recovery; seizing research opportunities that will underpin the future competitiveness of the economy; and ensuring the supply of appropriately skilled people, realising and continuing our sustained investment in the skills of doctoral graduates, and driving forward business performance. 34. In the medium term we will focus on investments into multidisciplinary research and partnerships to address key challenges for society, making sure we continue to invest in a healthy, flexible research base that covers a broad range of disciplines. We will work in partnership to stimulate research and cultivate the essential advanced skills to provide the bedrock for the UK to be a productive, healthy and sustainable society. 35. Our goal is to support research that generates economic growth for the UK and health and wellbeing for our population in a manner that is sustainable for the future. To do this we will focus on research that delivers impact into a focused range of sectors that we believe are central in achieving this goal: 8 Green economy Life science sector (including health and food) Digital economy High-value manufacturing systems and services Cultural and creative industries Q9. How does the UK s science and technology research funding strategy and spend compare with that in other countries and what lessons can be learned? In this regard, how does England compare with the devolved administrations? 36. The UK has enjoyed continued investment in research over the past two decades and we are currently halfway through the 2004 2014 Science and Innovation Investment Framework, with a stated Government commitment to this framework. At the Romanes lecture in Oxford on 27 February 2009, 9 Gordon Brown stated that: We will meet our ten-year commitment to maintain science spending with investment focusing on pure fundamental science as well as applied science in meeting our ten-year commitment we will maintain the ring fence we have placed around science funding - protecting money for science from competing demands in the short-term and providing the sustained support the research community needs to deliver world-class results in the medium and long term. 37. The UK s response to the current economic climate has differed from some of our key competitors. The US, Germany and Japan have this year announced very significant financial stimulus packages for R&D. The US federal R&D stimulus package is in the order of $21.5 8 Presented at the Research for our Future Event - See http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/future.htm 9 See http://www.number10.gov.uk/page18472 10

billion, Germany is allocating more than 15 billion of new money for research institutes over the next 10 years and the Japanese have recently announced a 9 billion S&T stimulus for the year 2009-2010. The Indian R&D budget has increased by 17% and the Chinese budget has increased by 25% in 2009, in spite of the economic downturn. 38. Increases in government R&D investment in competitor states may make these countries more attractive destinations for UK researchers in the future; however they will also create new opportunities for stronger interactions and exchange. Given the strength of UK research it is likely that countries with new monies will increasingly want to exploit UK expertise and the UK should be prepared to take advantage of opportunities for further collaboration, and strengthen efforts to address global challenges. Examples of this include the joint EPSRC/ National Science Foundation (NSF) sandpit on new directions in synthetic biology 10 and the NERC Rapid 11 and Rapid WATCH 12 programmes delivered with partners including the NSF, The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Research Council of Norway and the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Germany. 39. Strategic approaches to research funding will vary for each country. The UK and counterpart organisations in the US take an approach that balances researcher-driven and strategic priorities. Countries in Europe use a mix of researcher-driven and strategic priorities, with many having agencies similar to Research Councils which are at arm s length from Government, but often with more strategic funds being allocated from Ministries (for example, Germany). China and India both favour a top down strategic approach, but India to a much lesser degree. 40. A key strength of the UK is the number of established strategic partnerships which join up the spectrum of research and ensure more effective coordination across research funders and users. 41. The Research Councils are committed to funding excellent research in whichever UK region it is being carried out, and as such the Councils do not allocate funding on a regional basis. This means that the distribution of Research Council funding between England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales varies from year to year depending on the quality of research proposals received. The distribution of funds for research by the seven Research Councils during financial year 2007/08 is provided in Table 1. 10 See http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/callsforproposals/archive/jointsyntheticbiology.htm 11 http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/rapid/ 12 http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/rapidwatch/ 11

Research Grants K AHRC BBSRC EPSRC ESRC MRC NERC STFC RC Total % England 50,541 151,956 417,615 87,567 180,881 86,418 86,850 1,061,828 83.7 Scotland 6,486 28,042 67,554 9,318 18,265 16,042 11,761 157,467 12.4 N. 1,158 731 7,426 1,293 795 193 770 12,366 1.0 Ireland Wales 1,598 5,056 11,851 6,689 4,755 2,627 4,479 37,054 2.9 UK total 59,783 185,785 504,446 104,867 204,695 105,280 103,860 1,268,716 100 Studentships K AHRC BBSRC EPSRC ESRC MRC NERC STFC RC Total % England 36,018 34,460 173,663 46,937 41,711 26,071 12,799 371,659 84.2 Scotland 2,975 5,760 26,264 6,124 6,955 4,542 1,360 53,980 12.2 N. 598 0 950 88 65 23 1 1,725 0.4 Ireland Wales 1,135 662 5,770 3,200 1,151 1,902 503 14,323 3.2 UK total 40,726 40,882 206,647 56,349 49,882 32,538 14,663 441,688 100 Table 1. Research Council funding for research grants and studentships over FY2007/08. Notes: 1) EPSRC, figures are gross figures excluding capital; 2) MRC studentships comprises studentships and fellowships; research grants and studentships figures include all relevant grant/student/fellowship costs; 3) STFC research grants include fellowships; 4) For all Councils, figures exclude: Research Council Institutes; overseas grants, studentships and institutes; international subscriptions and central expenditure. RCUK, September 2009 12

Annex A - Research Council Links With Government Departments RCUK AHRC BBSRC EPSRC ESRC MRC The Core Issues Group (CIG), which includes the CSAs of government departments and the Chief Executives of the Research Councils, meets regularly to discuss issues of mutual interest. AHRC has links with numerous government departments via projects funded as part of responsive mode funding, strategic programmes and research centres. For example, the Director of the AHRC s Diasporas, Migration and Identities Programme was commissioned by the Home Office to produce a review of arts and humanities research literature relating to The Roots, Practices and Consequences of Terrorism. The Design Against Crime Research Centre, with some its projects funded by the AHRC, has provided advice on crime reduction to the Prime Minister s Strategy Unit. The AHRC also has a Concordat with the Home Office, and several more are being developed with other departments. BBSRC has working links with all relevant government departments, particularly Defra and, increasingly, DfID. Representatives from the BBSRC senior executive and research community sit on policy advisory bodies, for example the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE), NPL Advisory Committee and the TSEs funding forum. In addition, Defra commissions a significant amount of policy-focused research from the BBSRC sponsored institutes. BBSRC also works with Defra and the Food Standards Agency to ensure the EU Framework Programme 7 offers appropriate and timely opportunities to the UK research base in relevant areas. EPSRC has links with several government departments, including working extensively with DfT on joint calls and having a co-funding scheme with MoD (along with other Research Councils). As a specific example, EPSRC has the tools to work with DfT to tailor knowledge to specific policy challenges in sustainable transport. The CSA for DfT and BIS, Brian Collins, is on the EPSRC Technical Opportunities Panel and the MoD CSA, Mark Welland, is on EPSRC Council. EPSRC also works closely with DECC and the Energy Technologies Institute and a DECC representative sits on our Energy Scientific Advisory Group. EPSRC has regular bilaterals with Defra and the Environment Agency. ESRC has concordats with a number of government departments, in which research priorities and strategies are regularly discussed, as well as policy requirements for evidence and other items of mutual interest. Advice is also provided to government departments outside of the usual concordat arrangements. ESRC co-funds a number of research initiatives with government departments; for example, the ESRC and DfID have a joint research funding scheme focused on poverty reduction in developing countries. ESRC also co-funded research on Scottish demography with The Scottish Government. An example of ESRC research investments influencing policy is through the work of the Centre for Economic Performance (established by the ESRC in 1990), which has influenced policies including the Working Families Tax Credit Scheme and the National Minimum Wage. ESRC has also held public policy seminars. MRC has links with a number of government departments, the most formal being the relationship with OSCHR, DH and the other UK health departments and the concordat with DFID. Strategic alignment and greater coordination between the MRC and NIHR aims to facilitate the translation of health research and economic benefits within the UK. The MRC s concordat with DFID has been in effect for over fifteen years and provides a framework for the alignment of research strategies and the delivery of research funding. Under the concordat DFID currently allocates about 9M per 13

NERC STFC annum to the MRC. NERC collaborates with relevant government departments both on a bilateral basis and through forums, for example the Environmental Research Funders Forum (ERFF), the cross-departmental Marine Science Coordinating Committee (MSCC), and the UK Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS). NERC and Defra have a close relationship through regular meetings of the Chief Executive of NERC and the Defra CSA, as well as working level collaborations between Defra and the NERC community; for example many NERC staff have commented on Defra and EA science strategies, have direct working relations with Defra and EA project officers and sit on Defra/EA Theme Advisory Groups. NERC initiated the sciencepolicy partnership programme, Living With Environmental Change (LWEC), which has 18 partners including 6 Research Councils, 11 departments of state, government and agencies and one trading fund (the Met Office). NERC also cofunds a number of research programmes with government partners, for example, the Ecosystems Services and Poverty Alleviation programme with DfID (and ESRC), the Joint Climate Research Programme with the Met Office, and the Sustainable Marine Bioresources programme with Defra and the Scottish and Northern Ireland Governments. STFC and NERC have links with government departments through the British National Space Centre partnership. STFC has numerous links with UK government departments as well as working with the Scottish Government and the Welsh Assembly Government. Within the UK it has close relationships with both the Northwest Regional Development Agency and the South East England Development Agency, within whose regions the STFC Science and Innovation Campuses are based. STFC also works extensively with the international scientific community with regard to investments both in the UK and abroad, and this includes working with European Union bodies and institutions as well as with Governments around the world; this is achieved in collaboration with the appropriate UK Government representation and support. 14

Annex B - Examples of Alignment and Co-ordination of Publicly-Funded and Non-Publicly Funded Research By working with non-public funders of research at both the strategic and project level, the Research Councils encourage funding alignment: AHRC Collaboration with users Working with users to fund research can generate increased turnover. For example, Kingston University and the furniture designers Naughtone developed a process which generated new clients, and increased overall sales and contracts. It can also generate new knowledge and approaches. For example De Montfort University and the Phoenix Arts Centre designed an online new media centre, and developed a series of online classes/workshops, to develop staff skills in website design. BBSRC Research and Technology Clubs (RTCs) RTCs are supported jointly by BBSRC, other funding bodies and consortia of companies, and fund research that addresses priorities in BBSRC s Technology Strategy. Currently three clubs are running covering bioprocessing research, diet and health research, and integrated biorefining research; two further clubs (in ageing research and crop improvement research) are planned. Strategic Research Programmes BBSRC-sponsored research institutes run strategic research programmes which align BBSRC objectives and the objectives of other funders, including industry and other non-public funders; total research income from industry supporting these programmes is currently c 11M pa. BBSRC is a founding member of the UK Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS). UKCDS brings together UK funders and stakeholders who provide support for the development sciences research base. Members of UKCDS work together to establish a framework for coordinating development sciences research in the UK. Its aim is to provide sustainable improvements and benefits for the lives of the world's poorest people. EPSRC Some 2,300 user organisations collaborated on EPSRC research grants during 2008-09, and around 1400 PhD students were engaged on collaborative training projects; over 201 million in resources was committed by business and other users in support of new research grants (a significant increase on the 90million committed by users in 2007/8). 38 user organisations are involved in strategic partnerships with EPSRC formal agreements to co-fund research and training. Energy Technologies Institute EPSRC is the largest public funder of the Energy Technologies Institute a partnership between the UK Government and global energy developers, BP, Shell, E.ON, EDF Energy, Caterpillar and Rolls-Royce. This potentially 1bn partnership funds projects to demonstrate commercial viability of fledgling technologies, sharing the risks involved and accelerating commercial take up. Prof David Delpy, Chief Executive of EPSRC, is a board member of the ETI and EPSRC is working closely with the ETI on the development of programmes in the areas of renewable energy and energy efficient buildings. 15

SAMULET The SAMULET project launched in July this year is a collaborative programme that aims to accelerate the development and introduction of low carbon aircraft engine technology and to strengthen the supply chain for the UK s aero-engine industry. It is being led by Rolls-Royce working in a consortium alongside other high profile manufacturers, SMEs and several of the UK s top universities. EPSRC is investing 11.5M and the Technology Strategy Board 28.5M in the programme. Further support is under discussion with regional bodies, and total project value including industry investment is expected to be around 90M. ESRC Strategic Partnerships The ESRC has strategic partnerships with organisations across all the sectors with which it engages, including the Charity Commission and the Confederation of British Industry. Collaborative Research Ventures The ESRC's Collaborative Research Ventures Scheme was introduced in 2004 to develop funding partnerships with interested parties in business, public and third sectors, to co-fund high quality independent research and develop research capacity. Ventures funded to date include the Third Sector Research Centre and the Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy. The Third Sector Research Centre (TSRC) (co-funded by ESRC, Office of the Third Sector, and Barrow Cadbury Trust) is dedicated to analysing the impact of the sector's activities and effectiveness. The centre's work will strengthen the evidence base for the entire third sector (including charities, social enterprises and small community organisations) and will have specific research programmes of direct relevance to third sector policy and practice. Three Capacity Building Clusters will support the work of the TSRC. The Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy is a partnership of the ESRC, Office of the Third Sector, Scottish Executive, and Carnegie UK Trust. The Centre will support high quality independent research aimed at influencing policy and practice decisions in the UK as well as developing the necessary evidence base to better understand charitable giving and philanthropy issues. It also aims to help third sector organisations, government and business to better understand why and how individuals and businesses can give, helping to increase and target giving to support the public good. MRC National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) NCRI is a UK-wide partnership between the government, charity and industry which promotes cooperation in cancer research among the 21 member organisations 13 (including BBSRC, ESRC and MRC) for the benefit of patients, the public and the scientific community. NCRI has the role of maintaining strategic oversight of cancer research in the UK, identifying gaps and opportunities and coordinating the funding activities of the partner organisations. NCRI undertakes analyses to guide the strategic activities of the partner organisations. Once an area has been identified a Strategic Planning Group is established to develop a coherent approach between NCRI Partners to funding research in specific areas. Examples of priority areas identified by the NCRI partners for which there is on-going joint activity and shared funding include: National Prevention Research Initiative (NPRI) Supportive and Palliative Care 13 See http://www.ncri.org.uk/default.asp?sectionid=about_ncri&pageid=partners 16

Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy and associated Radiobiology Lung cancer Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanning NCRI and partner organisations are also developing the national infrastructure underpinning cancer research. This includes an NCRI Informatics Initiative and biosample bank co-ordination. Further details of the above activities can be found on the NCRI website http://www.ncri.org.uk. The National Prevention Research Initiative The National Prevention Research Initiative, managed by MRC, brings together 16 organisations from charity and public sectors 14 to support research on health behaviours associated with significant risks to health such as poor diet, physical inactivity, smoking and alcohol consumption and on the environmental factors that influence those behaviours. Research will aim to improve health and prevent chronic, non-communicable diseases or conditions such as certain cancers, heart and circulatory diseases, diabetes, obesity, stroke and dementia. An important cross-cutting theme of the Initiative, and evident in many of the projects, is risk reduction in communities or social groups with a high incidence of preventable diseases or conditions, and approaches to reduce inequalities in incidence of these diseases or conditions. The portfolio of 56 NPRI-funded awards is valued at ca. 21 million over 10 years, starting in 2005/6. The MRC contribution is 3.25 million. The projects cover the remit of health behaviours (individually or in combination) and environmental influences, involve both individual-level and population-level interventions and also natural experiments or make use of existing datasets for novel secondary analysis. A number of projects examine particular social or ethnic groups, children through to older age, and/or populations with particular mental health needs. A full list of awards is available on request. The UK Clinical Research Collaboration The UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) was established in 2004 with the aim of reengineering the clinical research environment in the UK, to benefit the public and patients by improving national health and increasing national wealth. The Partnership brings together the major stakeholders that influence clinical research in the UK. It includes the main UK research funding bodies; academia; the NHS; regulatory bodies; the bioscience, healthcare and pharmaceutical industries; and patients. The UKCRC represents a new way of working in which complex long-standing issues are tackled by key stakeholders working together. Strategic direction and oversight is provided by the UKCRC Board with broad stakeholder input into key issues. The Partnership is supported by a jointly funded, independent Secretariat and has a mixed model of working, where activities are: Led and administered by individual Partners on behalf of the Partnership Led by individual Partners and administered by the UKCRC Secretariat Led and administered by UKCRC Secretariat. 14 Alzheimer s Research Trust; Alzheimer s Society; Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council; British Heart Foundation; Cancer Research UK; Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health Directorate; Department of Health; Diabetes UK; ESRC; ESPRC; Food Standards Agency; MRC; Research and Development Office for the Northern Ireland Health and Social Services; The Stroke Association; Welsh Assembly Government; and World Cancer Research Fund. 17