Select Committee on Science and Technology Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence


APPENDIX 14

Memorandum submitted by the Royal Academy of Engineering

  The Royal Academy of Engineering comprises the United Kingdom's most eminent engineers of all disciplines. The Academy's objectives may be summarised as the pursuit, encouragement and maintenance of excellence in the whole field of engineering to promote the advancement of the science, art and practice of engineering for the benefit of the public. The Academy aims to take advantage of the wealth of engineering knowledge and experience that its Fellows possess. The interdisciplinary character of The Academy's membership provides a unique breadth of expertise with which to further all forms of engineering.

  By promoting a multi-disciplinary approach, The Academy is able to overcome traditional barriers and to demonstrate the interdependence of different areas of expertise in the efficient use of modern technology and engineering. Emphasis is also placed on the importance of well-informed communication between engineers, Government, research establishments, industry, public services and academia.

  The evidence which follows represents a collation of personal views from Fellows of The Royal Academy of Engineering. It cannot reflect the views of all contributing Fellows nor those of The Academy as a whole.

1.  GENERAL COMMENTS

  1.1  A difficulty experienced in attempting to assess the impact of the 1993 White Paper, "Realising Our Potential: A Strategy for Science, Engineering and Technology", is that no objectives were identified and no targets set against which measurements could be made. Nevertheless, the overall response from Fellows when asked about the impact of the 1993 White Paper is that there has been some change but not much is evident, since it takes a long time to achieve a change in culture and style of research and development. The 1993 Paper was viewed as an important and timely document which forced the nation to consider the balance and direction of its research and training initiatives. Fellows have commented that the nation's potential in science, technology and engineering is probably less now that it was in 1993.

  1.2  In re-reading the 1993 White Paper the demotion of science and engineering since then is most striking. In 1993, Science was represented at Cabinet level. Now, OST is subsumed into the DTI and led by a junior minister. The wished for co-ordination across government departments has not happened. There is still no clear voice in government for Science and Engineering.

  1.3  Despite substantial new funding in the 1997 Comprehensive Spending Review, the UK is way behind many of its competitors in terms of government spend on Science as a proportion of GDP. Government support to the Science and Engineering base from MoD and DTI has declined steadily over the intervening years. The UK is believed to be unique among the technologically advanced nations in reducing the proportion of defence budgets applied to Research and Technology.

  1.4  Changes in the status of the Government Research Establishments, from DRA to DERA and now to DERA PPP have done nothing to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of government funded research. Each change has engendered a degree of distrust between the Research Agency and Industry which has taken time to resolve, resulting in delays and inefficiencies in collaborative programmes. One area where some progress has been made is the setting up of DARPs (Defence and Aerospace Research Partnerships) where Academia, Industry and Government Research Agencies can come together to carry out collaborative programmes. But, even here, access to EPSRC funding has been disappointingly slow.

2.  THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE OBJECTIVES SET OUT IN THE 1993 WHITE PAPER, REALISING OUR POTENTIAL, HAVE BEEN DELIVERED?

  2.1  The annual publication of Forward Look to provide a clear and up-to-date statement of the Government's Strategy for science, engineering and technology (replacing the more limited annual review);

  The Forward Look is recognised as having become more focused and concise, targeted at a wider readership. Whilst it analyses expenditure and indicates priorities, it does not give a statement of the Government's strategy—unless the expenditure plans and collection of individual departmental statements are viewed as such. An identified deficiency with the Forward Look is that it tends to focus on obvious application areas whereas it should consider also those areas where science could contribute but where mechanisms are inadequate or non-existent eg social security.

  2.2  The creation of Technology Foresight (now Foresight), designed to "achieve a key culture change; better communication, interaction and mutual understanding between the scientific community, industry and government departments";

  There are mixed views on the achievements of the first round of Technology Foresight with much variability between the Panels. Initial participants have obtained a better view of the range of different aspects of the technology supply chain and benefited from the network of contacts. Continued efforts are needed to optimise the opportunities for industry/academic interactions. However, the effects of the Foresight programme are second order when compared with the combined effects of global competition and the massive private research, development and product innovation of the leading global companies.

  The loss of the Technology focus to Foresight is widely regretted.

  2.3  The abolition of the Advisory Council on Science and Technology its replacement with the Council for Science and Technology "to help ensure that the Government benefits from outside independent and expert advice when deciding on its own research spending priorities";

  The new Council for Science and Technology appears to be both invisible and ineffective. This is not a good advertisement for openness and accountability in government.

  2.4  A shifting of emphasis for technology transfer initiatives to place more importance on "the interchange of ideas, skills, know-how and knowledge between the science and engineering base and industry";

  The 1993 White Paper has promoted a culture change within the science community resulting in greater dialogue, partnership and collaboration. A similar culture change within industry would be welcomed. Research Council grant schemes designed to increase collaboration with industry have strengthened and new schemes have been introduced.

  2.5  Programmes to improve access for small and medium-sized enterprises to innovation support programmes;

  The LINK initiative is viewed as an extremely successful scheme, offering a mechanism for collaboration between the public and private sectors in areas of strategic importance to the national economy as identified by Foresight. The Teaching Company Scheme has also proved to be a valuable initiative in helping industry innovate through collaboration with research and education. A concern which has been expressed is that SMEs often have little spare manpower to investigate each scheme. They have been presented with a confusing picture and hence the objective of engaging them has not been met.

  2.6  The reorganisation of the Research Councils with modified structures and new mission statements which made more explicit their commitments to wealth creation and the quality of life.

  It is believed that, in general, the reorganisation of the Research Councils has been beneficial in improving focus with more useful industry inputs. The contribution expected of proposed research activity to wealth creation and quality of life has to be stated but this has had the effect of increasing the number of "safe" and "incremental" project proposals. A balance is required between wealth creation, skill development and knowledge creation to ensure that the science and engineering base is not eroded in the long term. Two notes of caution have been raised: one concerns the increasing bureaucracy of research funding which is driving researchers away from academia and into industry; the second is that research strategy is a matter of taste and of trust and that professionals in the particular subject should be involved in the grant-awarding process.

  2.7  The creation of the post of the Director-General of the Research Councils and the absorption of the functions of the Advisory Board for the Research Councils into the Office of Science and Technology;

  The creation of the post of the Director-General of the Research Councils (DGRC) has increased both collaboration and competition between the Research Councils. The impact of the post can, in part, be measured by the successful outcome of the 1997 Comprehensive Spending Review. The post should be allowed to develop to provide further information before judging the effects of the change. There is a concern that the creation of the post of DGRC has downgraded the positions of Heads of Research Councils with a potential lowering of standards amongst future applicants for these posts as they are now seen as essentially responsible to the DGRC.

  A commitment in the 1993 White Paper was to maintain and strengthen the Rothschild customer-contractor principle in relation to departmental applied research and development. Where departments have withdrawn funding from the Science Base the potential results for Research Council Institutes are redundancies, site closures and even loss of a national research capability, with the Science Budget picking up the cost. Another consequence of the privatisation of research establishments is that the staff are no longer civil servants and the flow of scientists between government departments and research establishments has diminished, to the detriment of the departments' development as intelligent customers.

  2.8  The launch of a new campaign to spread understanding of science among school children and the public;

  The spreading of the understanding of science and engineering amongst the public or schools has been mostly ineffective. The number and quality of young people embarking on science or engineering courses at university level remains a major bottleneck for the UK. Today, fewer school children than ten years ago wish to consider careers in either science or technology. There is a need to rethink how we enter into dialogue with young people—possibly through focusing on teacher training rather than on schools. It is hoped that the Lord Sainsbury initiated review of the role of the Engineering Council will yield positive results.

  It has been suggested that to attract people to careers in engineering there needs to be much greater exposure and teaching of "How Things Work". This should be at both Primary and Secondary education level but should be taught not as a scientific, numerate subject, but using language, drawing and visualisation. This would have the additional benefit of creating a more technologically literate society. The academic purity of studying underlying principles before applications is deterring young people from following technological careers. Many of the pioneers of the 18th and 19th century technological developments were practical people, not theoreticians.

3.  WHETHER THE OBJECTIVES AND THEMES OF THE 1993 WHITE PAPER REMAIN APPROPRIATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STRATEGY FOR SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY AND, IF NOT, WHAT OTHER THEMES AND OBJECTIVES WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL?

  3.1  The objectives and themes of the 1993 White Paper are generally considered to remain appropriate but with a need for a shift in focus. More must be done in those areas where progress has been slow eg the promotion of science and engineering to the young. The availability of skilled people is becoming a limiting factor more so than in 1993, exacerbated by an even greater shortfall in good schoolteachers, with a longer-term problem foreseen.

  3.2  A reservation expressed about the 1993 themes concerns the failure to address the globalisation of industry and research. The previous model was based on UK-industry and UK-academia working together but each is becoming increasingly difficult to define as global alliances are established.

  3.3  It has been pointed out that the changes in the 1993 paper were about the funding of R&D or improvement in the use of those funds A S&T strategy should be more than R&D funding eg guidelines on the use of scientific advice have little to do with funding as such but are an integral part of any S&T strategy. S&T does not equal R&D.

4.  WHETHER ATTEMPTS TO DELIVER THE PROPOSALS OF THE 1993 WHITE PAPER HAVE RESULTED IN A CULTURE CHANGE ACROSS, OR IN PARTS OF, THE SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY BASE, AND, IF SO, WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THIS CHANGE AND HOW HAS IT BEEN DEMONSTRATED?

  4.1  The extent of any culture change is very varied across the differing sectors of society but attitudes towards the importance of science, engineering and technology within a wealth creating economy remain unchanged. The benefits of the progress of technology are not recognised whilst the media pressurises the public with stories of health scares without quantification of risk, leaving scientists forced into a position of having to prove "negatives".

  4.2  Communication with the young and schools has been ineffective. It is recognised to be a highly complex issue but there is a lack of understanding of the challenge and the resultant effects of change.

  4.3  The Foresight activities have improved communications in certain areas through the creation of networks. However, the most effective changes to culture have arisen through market forces—expanding markets, global competition. Government policy has to be configured to work with these forces and help produce effective results. Tax incentives would appear to be necessary to encourage change in major areas of UK industry.

5.  THE GOVERNMENT'S RECENT CONSULTATION ON SCIENCE AND INNOVATION STRATEGY STATED THAT "THE AIM IS TO USE THE UK'S EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE TO ACHIEVE IMPROVEMENTS IN OUR NATIONAL INNOVATION PERFORMANCE AND SO TO IMPROVE THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE ECONOMY AND THE QUALITY OF EVERYONE'S LIFE" AND INDICATED ITS PLANS TO ACHIEVE THIS BY:

    —  sustaining the excellence of the science and technology base;

    —  encouraging private investment in innovation;

    —  streamlining knowledge transfer schemes and focusing them on clear goals;

    —  fostering regional networks;

    —  improving the flow of skilled scientists and engineers to industry;

    —  improving the ability of the science base to play a role in the knowledge economy;

    —  taking advantage of the globalisation of research; and

    —  improving public confidence by creating greater transparency in the regulation of science.

  DO YOU AGREE THAT THESE ARE APPROPRIATE AIMS FOR A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR SCIENCE?

  5.1  The aims listed, although mainly the means by which a strategy for S&T can better be delivered, are believed to be appropriate but consideration should be given to their prioritisation. The flow of trained people is especially important but this depends on the willingness of industry to employ them on attractive terms. Lack of recognition of the need to offer good rewards in the parochial UK labour market will result in the loss of expertise to the global research market.

  5.2  To ensure the supply of trained people in engineering and technology the academic base has to be sustained with people of the right calibre. The strategy must include schools as long term sustainability demands effective teaching of science, engineering and technology if the other stated objectives are to be achieved. The limited funding of universities and the low pay to university scientists will not achieve the aim of sustaining excellence. In the short term it will result in the flow of skilled scientists and engineers to industry but, already, even the major universities are experiencing a decline in the number of applicants of expected standing for academic posts. It is being said that "students are often brighter than the staff", giving rise to serious concern for the education of future engineers.

  5.3  The "reducing half-life of knowledge" has been identified as a concern since it requires people to prepare for more frequent "re-skilling". Those at a more mature age with a passion for science, engineering and technology will have to be retained by "re-skilling" when their particular skills set becomes redundant.

  5.4  Government initiatives to stimulate entrepreneurial growth, whilst applauded, suffer from difficult and complex regulations. This is thought to betray a begrudging Treasury influence more concerned with closing loopholes rather than a spirit of encouraging innovative companies.

6.  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE SHOULD BE THE MAIN FEATURES OF A MODERN STRATEGY FOR SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY AND WHY?

  6.1  The main features of a modern strategy for science, engineering and technology must encompass the promotion of excellence whilst maintaining and expanding the education and training base. Without a supply of trained people of adequate quality, global companies will relocate elsewhere but, whereas a focus on wealth creation and social welfare is understandable, it must not be at the cost of stifling "blue skies" activities: research driven by the perceived needs of "customers" stifles ground breaking innovation. There must be a strategy to encourage a flow of people trained to think, operate and contribute to a highly complex technical world: the output from government funding of the university system. Professionals practising in the fields of science, engineering and technology must acquire the skills necessary to communicate effectively with the general public through the media. This in turn will help attract able youngsters and encourage a better understanding in society.

12 June 2000





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2001
Prepared 3 April 2001