MEMORANDUM 32
Supplementary evidence from the Natural
Environment Research Council (NERC) Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
following the oral evidence session on 6 June 2007
Q132: The CEH written evidence states:
5.1 Within the DTI, research capacity is not
adequately prioritized as an asset to international trade, essential
if the UK is to be seen as a country of innovation.
Explain / provide examples to support this statement.
Item 5.1 of the CEH written evidence refers
to both general issues, and to specific matters closely linked
to CEH's areas of science.
1. GENERAL ISSUES
The DTI does not recognize research, education
and training as a Business Sector in its own right with particular
challenges and promotional needs. (http://www.dti.gov.uk/sectors/index.html)
In part, international science and innovation is addressed on
a sector by sector basis—but with each sector initiating
its own largely independent activities. This is despite the fact
that the knowledge generation and transfer industry attracts significant
inflow of funds.
Under its remit to promote UK trade the DTI
has invested heavily in promoting "innovation"—enabling
UK businesses to better exploit new ideas in the global economy.
http://www.dti.gov.uk/innovation/index.html. The generation of
new knowledge is the responsibility of OSI.
Through the OSI, the international science responsibilities
of DTI are characterised by:
— Delegation of responsibility for
driving international initiatives, along with the bulk of the
OSI funds, to the research councils.
— Dependence upon the EU Framework
Programme to deliver the UK government's international science
collaboration http://www.dti.gov.uk/science/uk-intl-engagement/page8386.html
— Reducing OSI engagement and support
for international research to the creation of high level bilateral
collaboration agreements, usually with a trade promotion emphasis,
and often lacking the specific financial resources to ensure effective
implementation.
— Knowledge transfer "to enhance
economic growth"—without adequate attention to quality
of life issues. http://www.dti.gov.uk/science/knowledge-transfer/index.html
In a knowledge based economy, there is a need
to recognize the knowledge generation sector (HEI's, PSRE's and
private research entities) is a business sector in its own right.
2. SPECIFIC CEH
INTERESTS
There is very little within the DTI international
science strategy, structures and resources to address quality
of life issues or apply the UK science base as an instrument of
foreign policy. There are many areas of UK foreign policy, development
policy and international environmental policy where the UK research
base could make a significant contribution. In general, the current
policies, organizational structures, and funding allocations do
not allow for UK science to be adequately applied for these purposes.
Selected recent examples where CEH science has,
or could have, been used in support of wider UK policy interests
include:
— Deforestation, climate change and
biodiversity conservation in the Amazonian Basin,
— Climate change impacts upon water
resources in Iran,
— Water resource estimation and management
in Palestine Territories,
— Improving water use efficiency in
Syrian irrigated agriculture,
— Minimal acceptable environmental
flows in Vietnamese rivers affected by new hydropower dam construction
in southern China,
— Data sharing, standardization, standardization
of water resource estimation methodologies in the Nile Basin—a
basic requirement to viable transboundary water sharing agreements,
— Similar water science based collaborative
network (under UNESCO-IHP) in the SADC region of Africa,
— Climate Change, water resources and
food security in the Indian sub-continent.
All of these examples are long term regional
issues, of considerable political importance and involve a capacity
building component. Scientific collaboration can be a powerful
tool.
In part, the emphasis upon science as a tool
for wealth creation, rather than for quality of life, (and foreign
policy/development/international environmental issues) is a symptom
of the hosting of the OSI within a government department whose
main interest is the promotion of trade and wealth creation.
Q177: Provide examples of the litigious business
environment (and unlimited liability) being a barrier to CEH international
research.
Examples of how legal issues affect CEH international
research collaboration are:
A2.1: DFID : The DFID standard contract
requires organizations undertaking research for DFID to accept
unlimited liability for potential future claims. NERC was not
prepared to accept these terms and hence NERC-DFID collaboration
has had to be developed using different legal instruments.
This situation has been driven by the recent
legal action by a City of London law firm to bring a class action
on behalf of Bangladeshi villages for damages related to the alleged
failure of BGS scientists to foresee the potential presence of
elevated levels of arsenic in groundwater in that region. While
the case was thrown out by the Courts, both DFID and NERC incurred
considerable costs in defending themselves. NERC has sought to
improve its management of contractual risk, while DFID has moved
to shift risk to organizations undertaking research on its behalf.
A2.2 Collaborative research in North America
: NERC has a policy to not enter into contracts with US or Canadian
organizations where those contracts are subject to US or Canadian
law. This includes the World Bank and other major international
funders.
June 2007
| 
