Memorandum 172
Submission from the Royal Academy of Engineering
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The overriding messages of this response
are that the Government must recognise the difference between
scientific advice and engineering advice and ensure that policy
is appropriately informed by engineering advice at all stages
of development and delivery. Presently, the Government does not
articulate a clear view of the role of engineering in society
or in policy making. Too often, phrases such as "science
and technology" or scientific "innovation" are
fielded as a substitute for "engineering".
1.2 Engineering is concerned with the art
and practice of changing the world in which we live. In doing
this, engineers seek to achieve useful and beneficial outcomes
in the physical world and in a business context. Much Government
policy is delivered by means that require engineering solutions,
which need to be developed, informed and tested by engineers as
part of the policy development process.
1.3 As well as informing the delivery of
policy, engineers can bring perspectives to policy formation that
can enhance decision-making at all stages of the policy cycle.
Engineers understand how to work with risk and uncertainty in
project delivery, a key element of identifying and weighing options
in policy formation. In articulating the engineering issues inherent
in and raised by a policy, engineers can help identify potential
barriers to implementation and ways of avoiding them.
1.4 A number of key policies fundamental
to the long-term national well-being have suffered and been found
wanting as a result of a lack of good engineering advice being
taken at the formulation stage. The Climate Change Bill, Sustainability
and Planning Bill and recent Energy Bills over the last five years
failed to address engineering risks and reality in delivering
the engineering assets required to enable policy to be realised
and targets to be met.
1.5 Government should make better use of
the expertise that resides in the engineering institutions and
their overarching bodies to obtain engineering advice at all stages
of the policy cycle. The Royal Academy of Engineering could act
as a broker in the preparation, collation and submission of profession-wide[19]
advice where and when it is required.
1.6 Government needs to be an intelligent
customer for the engineering advice it receives. This means having
civil service staff who are able to understand and evaluate engineering
advice. With the focus strongly on evidence-based policy, the
civil service should have amongst its staff engineers who are
able to source and assess technical evidence. Evidence-based policy
in key areas such as climate change, energy supply and low-carbon
transport is only achievable with the input of policy advisers
with an understanding of the required evidence-and that will include
engineering evidence.
1.7 There always have been highly qualified
engineers employed within Government, but because engineering
has generally always been seen as a policy delivery issue rather
than a policy development issue, those engineers have predominantly
been employed in Agencies rather than Departments. As political
ideas and imperatives are developed into policy within Departments,
there is a need to embed engineering advice within them.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 The response makes the following recommendations
which appear here in the same order as they do in the text:
(a) Certain key Departments should have Chief
Engineering Advisers, rather than or as well as Chief Scientific
Advisers to reflect the increased importance of engineering to
those Departments. Chief Engineering Advisers in these Departments
are likely to be engineers by profession (as some DCSAs already
are). This would allow them to articulate and address the engineering
issues faced by those Departments and would ensure that the Government
Chief Scientific Adviser has access to engineering advice within
his or her team. Chief Scientific Advisors and Chief Engineering
Advisors also require high quality staff support within their
Departments if they are to provide a service with the required
breadth.
(b) Effort should be made to recruit engineers
with practical experience of large-scale projects to these posts.
The required remuneration package and terms of employment to attract
a senior engineer from industry to a DCSA post will be necessarily
different from that offered to an academic engineer expected to
maintain his or her post at a university and return to it after
the term of office as a DCSA.
(c) The GCSA and the DCSAs should meet regularly
with the engineering profession (through the Royal Academy of
Engineering, the engineering Institutions and their overarching
bodies) to communicate issues of current interest and discuss
the sourcing of engineering advice.
(d) Engineering advice should be sought early
in the policy development process even if the engineering aspect
of a problem is not obvious to policy makers.
(e) Any large-scale project should be carried
out with the advice of engineers-engineers have project management
skills relevant to complex projects, especially those with a technical
component.
(f) Advisory committees should be established
in Government Departments which should be used to identify when
engineering advice is needed and on what issues. The engineering
community, through the engineering institutions and the Royal
Academy of Engineering could advise on members for such committees.
(g) Open and formal processes for inviting engineering
advice at the onset of policy consideration should be established.
(h) Recruitment of engineers through the Fast
Stream should be increased, with more engineering graduates able
to forge careers within the civil service, leading to senior positions,
but with the opportunity to retain engineering as a specialism.
(i) Government should actively advertise the
role for engineering graduates in the civil service for policy
development functions as well as through delivery Agencies, so
that it is perceived to be a viable career path.
(j) The Government should require the professional
registration of both its technical staff and also the staff of
its consultants and suppliers to ensure that it receives the best
advice from fully qualified, up to date engineers.
(k) Government should be encouraged to consider
the engineering community as a resource for informing policy at
all stages as the US government does with the National Academies.
(l) An understanding should be developed of how
Governments in other countries take engineering advice as part
of the policy process.
2.2 In addition to making these recommendations,
the professional engineering community offers:
(a) To continue to undertake policy studies that
identify matters of importance to Government policymaking, provided
there is a willing recipient for those reports.
(b) To respond, as a coordinated body, to requests
to give advice on draft policy and to peer review research carried
out for Government, when invited.
(c) To agree a process with Government whereby
the professional engineering community can provide advice on key
policy topics to support Government decision-making.
3. THE ROLE
AND EFFECTIVENESS
OF THE
GOVERNMENT OFFICE
FOR SCIENCE
AND THE
CHIEF SCIENTIFIC
ADVISERS IN
PROVIDING ENGINEERING
ADVICE ACROSS
GOVERNMENT AND
COMMUNICATING ISSUES
RELATING TO
ENGINEERING IN
GOVERNMENT TO
THE PUBLIC
3.1 The system of Departmental Chief Scientific
Advisers (DCSAs) is new-the result of an initiative of the previous
Governmental Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA), Sir David King.
At this stage, it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of the
system. Some general comments can, however, be made.
3.2 Firstly, the role of the GCSA is broad,
intended to encompass both science and engineering. This is not,
however, reflected in the department's title (Government Office
for Science), unless it is simply assumed that engineering is
a sub-discipline of science. But engineering is a quite different
discipline, pursued in a different manner towards different ends.
Engineering is concerned with solving practical problems and in
changing the physical world, using scientific, technical and business
skills. Science, on the other hand, is principally about understanding
the nature of the world. The practical nature of engineering means
that engineering advice and expertise is of great value in developing
policy and delivering projects. For example, the need for engineering
advice is particularly pertinent in the area of climate change.
The big challenge is no longer the search for evidence for climate
change but rather the search for means of avoiding its advance
and mitigating its effects, many of which will be matters of engineering
and technology.
3.3 The impact of the GCSA depends to a
large extent on the influence of the individual DCSAs within their
Departments and the strong leadership provided by the GCSA ensuring
the role of the DCSAs is appreciated and understood at Cabinet
level. The recent GCSAs have done a very effective job of raising
the profile of the scientific aspects of policy issues, especially
in the arena of climate change. The status and impact of the DCSAs
depend in part on how many opportunities they have to speak to
ministers. The support they get in terms of staff is also an issue
as most of the DCSAs are part-time positions. Building the influence
of DCSAs within their Departments might be helped by making the
posts full-time and ensuring that DCSAs have appropriate and effective
staff resources within Departments.
3.4 There are some Departments in which
it is important that an engineer fills the DCSA role-the DfT,
the MoD and potentially BERR and DIUS. In these cases, it would
make sense to call these advisers Chief Engineering Advisers,
to reflect the kinds of expertise needed and the advice required.
In the MoD for example, there is a Chief Scientist, and the Defence
Science Advisory Board. The MoD is a Department where the budgetary
spend on engineering is ten times that spent on science. Science
advice in MOD is a combination of blue sky research, management
of applied research, operational analysis and scrutiny of technical
requirements and project approvals. Engineers are involved in
this but are mainly engaged in delivering equipment projects.
The CSA's role is an essential element of the checks and balances
over billons of pounds of public expenditure on mainly high-tech
projects. Although DSTL is an agency of the MOD (employing more
engineers and scientists than any other Government agency), its
expertise does appear to be used by the MOD in policy formation
far more than any other agency in Government. In other Departments
both scientific and engineering advice is needed-DEFRA is a clear
example where the life sciences and engineering are both relevant,
yet the current description of the role of its CSA does not include
the provision of engineering advice.[20]
In these Departments, it should be made clear in the job description
and potentially in the job title that providing and assessing
engineering advice is a core role. It is also important that the
expertise of advisers is not limited to their own Department.
Many issues and the successful delivery of many policies cut across
Departmental boundaries and a free exchange of engineering advice
across Departments is necessary. For example, a transport issue
being considered by the DCSA for the DfT might impinge on local
community issues addressed by the DCLG and environmental issues
addressed by DEFRA.
3.5 Many of the current DCSAs are scientists
and engineers working in academia who may not have current experience
of delivering major industrial projects. This could result in
the CSA service struggling to provide robust advice on practical
application of scientific and technical knowledge and therefore
in the successful delivery of policies even where they are based
on robust scientific and technical evidence. The search for DCSAs
should extend beyond the world of academic research into business
and industry where there is a wealth of skill in finding appropriate,
cost-effective solutions to practical problems. This experience
would be invaluable in helping Departments to understand practicalities
of rolling out technology at scale and understanding the breadth
of engineering research in the private sector, research that the
Government can stimulate and can gain from.
3.6 We recommend that:
3.6.1 Certain key Departments should have
Chief Engineering Advisers, rather than or as well as Chief Scientific
Advisers to reflect the increased importance of engineering to
those Departments. Chief Engineering Advisers in these Departments
are likely to be engineers by profession (as some DCSAs already
are). This would allow them to articulate and address the engineering
issues faced by those Departments and would ensure that the Government
Chief Scientific Adviser has access to engineering advice within
his or her team. Chief Scientific Advisors and Chief Engineering
Advisors also require high quality staff support within their
Departments if they are to provide a service with the required
breadth.
3.6.2 Effort should be made to recruit engineers
with practical experience of large-scale projects to these posts.
The required remuneration package and terms of employment to attract
a senior engineer from industry to a DCSA post will be necessarily
different from that offered to an academic engineer expected to
maintain his or her post at a university and return to it after
the term of office as a DCSA.
3.6.3 The GCSA and the DCSAs should meet
regularly with the engineering profession (through the Royal Academy
of Engineering, the engineering Institutions and their overarching
bodies) to communicate issues of current interest and discuss
the sourcing of engineering advice.
4. THE USE
OF ENGINEERING
ADVICE IN
GOVERNMENT POLICY
MAKING AND
PROJECT DELIVERY,
INCLUDING EXAMPLES
OF POLICY
DECISIONS OR
PROJECT DELIVERY
THAT HAVE
BEEN OR
WILL BE
TAKEN WITH
OR WITHOUT
ENGINEERING ADVICE
4.1 Engineers are not sufficiently often
invited to contribute to policy development-their role seems to
be restricted to implementation and checking of policy after the
fact. But the routine engineering practices of comparing solutions
for cost-effectiveness, efficacy and public acceptability would
be highly valuable in informing policy decision-making at the
earliest stage. Engineers' skills in project management would
also be useful in scrutinising complex policy delivery.
4.2 Recent energy policy is an area of policy
development that appears to have suffered as a result of lack
of engineering input at an early stage. We have been told privately
by reliable sources that unrealistic estimates have been made
about the contribution of non-fossil fuel sources to energy supply
and CO2 emissions reduction as well as the potential carbon emissions
savings of various energy efficiency measures. A sound engineering
insight would have given a clearer picture of the contributions
of the different energy technologies, the timescales in which
they could feasibly come on-stream and the measures necessary
to mitigate risk-whether technical, political, commercial or otherwise.
Engineers' views are also essential to identify barriers to certain
policy solutions as well as ways to circumvent or overcome them.
For example, while the use of microgeneration of electricity through
wind power might be recommended, this recommendation is undermined
by the fact that the electricity grid is not currently[21]
designed to deal with the feeding back of large amounts of power
into the grid-the distribution system is designed to be one-way.
4.3 Recent plans for developing Eco-towns
were drawn up with the help of a steering committee (the Eco Towns
Challenge Panel) which had no engineering input. The contribution
of an engineer in this case would have been to look at the intended
outcome-reducing domestic carbon emissions within the UK-and assessing
whether this was the best means to meet that outcome. Engineers
would have been highly likely to conclude that the outcome would
be better served by retro-fitting existing housing to reduce its
carbon emissions, a view that seems to be emerging through the
consultation process.
4.4 Large IT systems are an area of Government
procurement that has and continues to experience both bad press
and implementation problems. Some would assert that specifications
have been driven by political imperatives rather than being derived
from operational requirements; a situation which would apply to
both the ID Card project and the National IT Programme (Connecting
for Health). It is possible that this approach has led to decisions
about the architecture of systems being taken or assumed before
detailed expert advice was taken. Here, a distinction needs to
be made between the advice received by Government in the procurement
of systems, which is often good and realistic, and the advice
received in the development of policies which are delivered through
the procurement of IT, which is often lacking.
4.5 The MoD has the Defence Science Advisory
Council, but there are limited opportunities for inputting engineering
advice through this structure. Advisors have said that they are
unable to get close to the real engineering problems themselves,
and have a somewhat distant role, being asked to comment on the
scientific quality of advice received in terms of the bibliometric
citation rate of the authors rather than addressing the real world
problems the advice has been sought to address. Although the MoD
continues to struggle to deliver projects to time, cost and performance,
it appears more likely to take engineering advice than other Departments.
The recent review of the Royal Navy procurement of two large aircraft
carriers by Sir John Parker FREng was instigated at a late stage
to give the Government comfort that the contract could be managed
and delivered by industry. It is welcome that the Government should
seek such advice, but it could be an integral part of the procurement
process for difficult projects rather than a late stage add-on.
4.6 Although aspects of risk are routinely
addressed in the assessment and development of policy, the specifics
of engineering risk are more often than not entirely missed. As
an engineering concept of risk is wide, including project risk
as well as risk of failure or catastrophe, an appreciation of
it in the policy development phase when implementation relies
on engineering would be advisable. In many cases, particularly
in energy policy, the financial risk that investors are expected
to take on has been badly assessed, leading to financial incentive
structures being put into place that can actually increase risk
to investors.
4.7 We recommend that:
4.7.1 Engineering advice should be sought
early in the policy development process even if the engineering
aspect of a problem is not obvious to policy makers.
4.7.2 Any large-scale project should be
carried out with the advice of engineers-engineers have project
management skills relevant to complex projects, especially those
with a technical component.
5. HOW GOVERNMENT
IDENTIFIES THE
NEED FOR
ENGINEERING ADVICE
AND HOW
GOVERNMENT SOURCES
ENGINEERING ADVICE
5.1 From the point of view of the profession,
there are neither established means by which Government decides
when engineering advice is required nor what advice specifically
is needed. There is also no clear, open and formal process by
which individuals or groups are invited to provide advice or proposals.
This style of much policy making has led to some individual engineers
and industrialists being called on to provide policy advice, however
this advice is seldom peer reviewed. It would, however, be possible
for Government to access a broader range of engineering advice
by means of a more formal policy-making process that would call
for advice and ideas at a much earlier stage than at present.
The current formal consultation stage in policy-making, where
open invitations for evidence are made, is generally at a late
stage of policy development by which time the direction of travel
is often already framed and the opportunities to explore alternative
solutions are closed.
5.2 The Government often procures engineering
advice from external consultants which is of variable quality.
For instance, we understand that some reports produced for the
DfT Low Carbon Cars strategy produced by third party consultants
under extreme time pressures contained inaccuracies that would
be obvious to an engineer with relevant expertise, but not necessarily
to an official without that expertise or access to it. Engineering
expertise is needed within Government Departments to ensure the
quality of the procurement and quality control of that advice.
5.3 Advisory committees such as DSAC in
the MoD and the interdisciplinary committee in the Home Office
have great potential value in advising Departments on whether
engineering advice would be valuable to inform policy development
and planning policy implementation. There are engineers with the
relevant experience on these committees to fulfill this role and
it is the duty of the relevant Departments to engage them appropriately.
5.4 Greater use could also be made of university
research, but there are obstacles to academic-Government interaction.
As will be discussed in a forthcoming Council for Science and
Technology (CST) report, there are disincentives for academics
to carry out research for Government use. The results are often
secret, or at least not published, so they cannot be used by the
academic as examples of their work. Government Departments may
offer little remuneration or may expect work to be carried out
pro bono. Often the process of setting out what advice
is needed is too extended, meaning that academics may have moved
on to other projects between being invited to provide advice to
Government and receiving the details of the arrangement. The Academy's
experience of helping to place engineers on advisory panels for
various Departments and Agencies is that remuneration or honoraria
range from average to inadequate considering the amount of expertise
and engagement requested.
5.5 The CST itself is a valuable source
of advice on engineering. Although the title does not include
"Engineering", the Council includes many engineers amongst
its membership (with more Fellows of The Royal Academy of Engineering
than of The Royal Society). But Government rarely proactively
seeks advice from the CST and the reports produced by the CST
are not always heeded. The CST's report Better use of personal
information: opportunities and risks (November 2005), is a salient
case in point that contained timely advice the Government would
have done well to heed.
5.6 The issue of engineering advice also
extends to advice about how to ensure an adequate supply of competent
professional engineers and technicians. Here, the Royal Academy
of Engineering and the engineering institutions have worked closely
to respond to Government wish to clarify and strengthen careers
advice. However, in the field of education, despite the importance
of engineering to the economy, advice tends to be sought first
from the Sector Skills Councils, and rarely specifically solicited
from the profession. This can lead to short-sightedness on the
part of Government on such issues as the Bologna Declaration,
and the development of the new points-based immigration rules
(which fail to recognise professional qualifications).
5.7 We recommend that:
5.7.1 Advisory committees should be established
in Government Departments which should be used to identify when
engineering advice is needed and on what issues. The engineering
community, through the engineering institutions and the Royal
Academy of Engineering could advise on members for such committees.
5.7.2 Open and formal processes for inviting
engineering advice at the onset of policy consideration should
be established.
6. THE STATUS
OF ENGINEERING
AND ENGINEERS
WITHIN THE
CIVIL SERVICE,
INCLUDING ASSESSMENTS
OF THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF
THE SCIENCE
AND ENGINEERING
FAST STREAMS,
AND THE
ROLE AND
CAREER PROSPECTS
OF SPECIALIST
ENGINEERS IN
THE CIVIL
SERVICE
6.1 The Fast Stream of the Civil Service
encourages a culture of educated generalism. Fast streamers spend
time in all parts of a Department to gain an understanding of
all aspects-giving the ability to take a broader view. However,
the focus on handling a new brief every two to three years and
delivering ministerial advice pulls against the retention of specialist
skills and knowledge. Within the Science and Engineering Fast
Stream it may be possible for engineering graduates to specialise
in engineering-related projects, but the numbers of graduates
entering via this route is small-15 in 2007-08 compared with 190
recruited to central departments and 100 into the Economics Fast
Stream. And of course, this number encompasses both science and
engineering graduates and it is likely that the greater proportion
is from science.
6.2 In Government, the focus is strongly
on evidence-based policy, so it would seem important that it has
amongst its staff engineers and scientists able to source and
assess technical evidence. Evidence-based policy in key areas
such as climate change, energy supply, low carbon transport and
so on is only achievable with the input of policy advisers with
an understanding of the required evidence-and that will include
engineering and other technical evidence, whereas this is currently
done by analysis professionals, usually with an economics background.
6.3 More engineers are needed within the
civil service if Government is to be a genuinely intelligent customer
of external advice, with sufficient expertise to be certain of
knowing what questions to ask and to assess the accuracy of answers
returned. The potential for establishing Government policy on
incorrect evidence is of concern. For example, the errors in the
reports on low carbon cars for the DfT could have been used to
make policy decisions. There is therefore a pressing need for
more engineers within the civil service, as lack of engineering
expertise can lead to financially and politically costly errors.
There must not only be a recognised career path for engineers
within the civil service, but engineers must be recognised for
their contribution to the policy making process and must not be
perceived as career limited as compared to other professions within
the civil service.
6.4 However it is not just a numbers game.
The competence of those in post should not be taken for granted
in such a fast moving profession. The engineering institutions
exist, in part, to develop and maintain high professional standards
in engineering. The institutions assess and register engineers
to the standards agreed by ECuk and all require their members
to comply with a professional code of conduct. Most provide information,
continuing professional development and networking opportunities
that enable engineers to stay up to date and competent. Whilst
this may appear to be self promotion on the part of the engineering
institutions, we contend that Government can only be confident
with the advice it receives if it has been provided by a competent,
assessed practitioner.
6.5 We recommend that:
6.5.1 Recruitment of engineers through the
Fast Stream should be increased, with more engineering graduates
able to forge careers within the civil service, leading to senior
positions, but with the opportunity to retain engineering as a
specialism.
6.5.2 Government should actively advertise
the role for engineering graduates in the civil service for policy
development functions as well as through delivery Agencies, so
that it is perceived to be a viable career path.
6.5.3 The Government should require the
professional registration of both its technical staff and also
the staff of its consultants and suppliers to ensure that it receives
the best advice from fully qualified, up to date engineers.
7. THE ROLE
AND EFFECTIVENESS
OF PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS AND
THE ENGINEERING
COMMUNITY IN
PROMOTING ENGINEERING
AND PROVIDING
ENGINEERING ADVICE
TO GOVERNMENT
AND THE
CIVIL SERVICE
7.1 The professional engineering organisations
have the potential to make a significant contribution to Government
policy. The focus of the professions is the public good and the
engineering profession seeks to improve quality of life through
its work. Therefore, professional bodies have a duty to input
to public policy processes. The engineering bodies have a greater
interest in providing such advice than does industry which naturally
focuses on growing a market, shareholder value, international
competitiveness and so on. We support the advice of the erstwhile
Science and Technology Committee in its 2006 report Scientific
advice, risk and evidence-based policy making that Government
should turn more readily to the profession and learned societies.
7.2 Individually and collectively, the engineering
institutions offer what advice they can but recognise that this
advice must be well co-ordinated and focused. The institutions,
with The Royal Academy of Engineering acting as focal point, are,
however, able to commit to provide Government with detailed, co-ordinated,
professional advice. However, for this to work optimally, an agreed,
clear mechanism for dialogue will be needed. A number of engineering
institutions as well as the Academy already publish high quality
policy advice to Government,[22]
but better communication would ensure that this advice were more
timely, constructive and informative.
7.3 The institutions and The Royal Academy
of Engineering could help provide engineering advisory committees
for key Government Departments to assist Departments in scoping
questions for consultants and peer-reviewing the resulting work.
Such committees could also comment on the feasibility of policies
such as the national ID card plan to highlight strategic engineering
and technical issues around their delivery. A positive example
of such an undertaking is the engineering advisory group convened
by BERR for the Severn Barrage feasibility study, comprising members
of The Royal Academy of Engineering, the IET, IMechE, IChemE and
the ICE.
7.4 However, there is always a limit on
how quickly a group of professional engineers providing advice
on a voluntary basis can produce the information needed by Government
Departments. The engineering community should not be the sole
source of engineering advice-there must also be competent engineers
within Departments who can provide engineering expertise and assess
the work of consultants. It is most important that engineering
is embedded in the civil service so that policymakers are alive
to the engineering aspects of policy and know when to ask for
advice and how to use it.
7.5 A more structured process for the provision
of advice, agreed by Government and the professional engineering
community, would greatly improve the effectiveness of the provision
of independent advice.
7.6 We offer:
7.6.1 To continue to undertake policy studies
that identify matters of importance to Government policymaking,
provided there is a willing recipient for those reports.
7.6.2 To respond, as a coordinated body,
to requests to give advice on draft policy and to peer review
research carried out for Government, when invited.
7.6.3 To agree a process with Government
whereby the professional engineering community can provide advice
on key policy topics to support Government decision-making.
8. INTERNATIONAL
EXAMPLES OF
HOW ENGINEERS
AND ENGINEERING
ADVICE ARE
EMBEDDED IN
GOVERNMENT
8.1 In the USA, there is a constitutional
relationship between the Executive, the Legislature and the National
Academies, with the Executive and Congress procuring research
through the National Research Council (NRC). As a result, the
US National Academy of Engineering (which stands in a similar
relationship to the US engineering societies as The Royal Academy
of Engineering does to the engineering institutions in the UK),
is a large, well-staffed organisation that is able to be responsive
to the needs of Government. Although the National Academies in
the USA were established with this relationship intended from
the outset, the engineering community in the UK, with The Royal
Academy of Engineering as the co-ordinating body, could develop
a similar role. This could become a two-way communications channel
between the community and Government, with Government requesting
advice and the community responding promptly. The collaboration
between The Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society
on the Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies report, which was commissioned
by Government, is very much in the US mould. Opportunities for
similar projects that bring together experts from the engineering
community should be sought by both Government and the engineering
community. In summer 2007, an offer was made to the Treasury and
BERR by the engineering community to produce a report on the engineering
aspects of climate change. This was not taken up but would have
been a substantial piece of work of great value in informing energy
policy.
8.2 Another initiative to adopt from the
USA might be the secondment of senior engineers to Government
departments. In the USA engineers are seconded to departments
such as Department of Defense and Department of Energy. This would
be an effective way for Government to make use of the experience
of engineers in industry.
8.3 In China the engineering professions
and government have strong links. Obviously the political systems
in this country differs significantly from that in China, but
the close relationship between engineering and government and
the status of engineers within government is something that the
UK should learn from. If it is possible to understand why engineers
have this greater involvement and if it were possible to make
some steps toward creating such a situation in the UK, it could
have great benefit for the Government in being able to deal with
engineering challenges.
8.4 The Australian Government is focusing
effort on exploiting engineering expertise through the Prime Minister's
Innovation, Science & Engineering Council. The title of the
relevant senior position, held recently by former Institution
of Chemical Engineers President Dr Robin Batterham FREng, was
Chief Scientist; however the Council's scope clearly included
engineering. The Australian government is also developing a body
of experts on software systems engineering and looking for international
expertise to populate it. It is essential that our Government
recognises the need to use global engineering expertise as engineering
challenges require the best thinkers from around the world.
8.5 We recommend that:
8.5.1. Government should be encouraged to
consider the engineering community as a resource for informing
policy at all stages as the US government does with the National
Academies.
8.5.2 An understanding should be developed
of how Governments in other countries take engineering advice
as part of the policy process.
September 2008
THIS RESPONSE
HAS BEEN
PREPARED BY
THE ROYAL
ACADEMY OF
ENGINEERING WITH
THE INPUT
AND SUPPORT
OF A
LARGE BODY
OF ORGANISATIONS
FROM ACROSS
THE ENGINEERING
COMMUNITY, WHOSE
NAMES ARE
LISTED BELOW:
Signatories
The British Computer Society;
The British Nuclear Engineering Society;
The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers;
The Engineering and Technology Board;
The Energy Institute;
Engineering Council UK;
The Institute of Acoustics;
The Institute of Healthcare Engineering and Estate
Management;
The Institute of Highway Incorporated Engineers;
The Institute of Marine Engineering Science and Technology;
The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining;
The Institute of Measurement and Control;
The Institution of Agricultural Engineers;
The Institution of Civil Engineers;
The Institution of Chemical Engineers;
The Institution of Engineering and Technology;
The Institution of Engineering Designers;
The Institution of Lighting Engineers;
The Institution of Mechanical Engineers;
The Institution of Nuclear Engineers;
The Institution of Railway Signal Engineers;
The Institution of Royal Engineers;
The Institution of Structural Engineers;
The Institution of Water Officers;
The Royal Academy of Engineering;
The Royal Aeronautical Society;
The Royal Institution of Naval Architects;
The Society of Environmental Engineers; and
The Welding Institute.
19 Engineering encompasses pure civil, electrical,
process and mechanical engineering, of course, but also engineering
directly related to building, transportation, ICT, materials,
utilities, agriculture, healthcare, and mining. Back
20
See http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/how/adviser.htm Back
21
Although, with some planning and investment, engineered solutions
can be provided. Back
22
Some recent examples are recent typical examples being the Flooding
Report issued by the Institution of Civil Engineers in June 2008
,http://www.ice.org.uk/downloads/2008_flooding.pdf,
the IMechE Low Carbon Transport Report in March 2008 ,http://tinyurl.com/6bq2bm,
and the Need for Domestic Air Services in the UK, published by
the Royal Aeronautical Society in August 2008 http://tinyurl.com/5td67z Back
|