Memorandum submitted by the University
of Reading (SFS 21)
To the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
1. We are pleased to accept the invitation
to contribute in writing to the above inquiry as a University
that has a wide range of activities that potentially contribute
to the security of food supplies up to 2050. We were recently
ranked 8th in terms of world agricultural research institutions
(Appendix 1)[74]
and have a breadth of expertise including agricultural science,
horticulture, food science and technology, soil science, consumer
behaviour and marketing, and agrarian development worldwide. Similarly,
in the recent Research Assessment Exercise, the University of
Reading submitted 93.1 Full-Time Equivalent research staff
in Agriculture and Food.
2. Our response covers two of the requested
areas, the science base and the provision of education and training,
as these constitute part of our core business. Despite the University
of Reading's maintenance of a strong land-based research capability,
the inquiry needs to be aware of the closures of research facilities
elsewhere across the UK over the last three decades. Such closures
have not occurred solely in the public-funded sector, but also
occurred in commercial agricultural science research. Indeed,
a great deal of agri-science business in the UK is now represented
by multinationals based outside the UK. Many such multinationals
do not operate significant agricultural science research activity
within the UK (although dissemination activities do continue),
and even for those that do continue some of their research activity
within the UK the majority of significant investment decisions
are taken well beyond our shores. This is not a criticism of such
multinational companies. Indeed, the university works well with
several multinationals in relation to each of research and training.
However, DEFRA and other UK government departments may have limited
influence on the strategic research direction of these major players.
3. The University's Faculty of Life Sciences
is particularly concerned about the future availability of both
UK research scientists and in relation to leadership in the land-based
sector that will ensure our competiveness and ability to explore
new options to ensure the sustainability of food supplies in the
medium to long-term, within the UK and beyond. This issue may
become more serious comparatively rapidly, because the greatly-diminished
supply of young agricultural scientists over the last decade or
more has not yet been especially visible to society at large because
traditionally agricultural scientists have a commitment to their
subject throughout their working lives. Accordingly, the availability
of researchers in the agricultural sciences has remained comparatively
high. This has been a function of the demography of agricultural
scientists, whereby large numbers were trained in the several
decades after the Second World War. Many of that post-war generation
of agricultural scientists have retired (or were compulsorily
early retired) but have continued to contribute to agricultural
science and its dissemination by working as (often self-employed)
consultants. I suggest that that generation's substantial contributions
will now diminish rapidly and quickly as they seek to retire fully.
4. In relation to new recruits into areas
that will ensure food security, the University of Reading continues
to run undergraduate programmes in a wide range of areas of great
importance to food security and to continue to attract well-qualified
students on to these programmes. However, recruitment of well-qualified
students with Science A Levels (etc) onto such programmes is difficult
because of: (a) the reduction in the popularity of science in
many schools; and (b) a less flattering image of agriculture within
society in general, and especially amongst young people, compared
to the immediate post-war period.
5. Another supply of agricultural scientists
and leaders comes from those who study pure science first degrees,
such as biology, and who then study applied Masters level programmes
relevant to food supply and sustainability. Again, the University
of Reading has a range of offerings in this area—although
it is increasingly difficult to encourage high-quality graduates
on to these programmes. This has led over time to the withdrawal
of our MSc programmes in the areas of, for instance, Crop Physiology,
Plant Breeding and Animal Science.
6. In the several decades after the Second
World War, government (e.g. the MAFF postgraduate scheme) and
industry (e.g. the MMB research studentships) funding supported
three-year agricultural and food postgraduate research studentships
substantially. These two particular schemes, and many similar
ones, ended some time ago. Limited funding does remain available,
but is a fraction of that available previously. If there were
a single, positive, outcome possible from your inquiry then we
would suggest that you examine closely the erstwhile MAFF postgraduate
scheme for the agricultural sciences (which in my opinion was
very successful) with a view to DEFRA resuming this activity.
Your analysis might well indicate that it would be justified solely
from the point of view of both DEFRA's and the FSA's future agri-food
science staffing needs from 2015, or earlier, onwards.
7. Finally, may we also suggest that you
treat any data on numbers in education or training in the agricultural
sciences with a degree of caution, simply because it is often
not sufficiently detailed. For example, a student studying equine
management is less likely to contribute to food security that
one studying agriculture. However, the national data available
(e.g. "land-based studies") tend not to discriminate
at this level of detail.
Professor Richard Ellis
Dean, Faculty of Life Sciences
University of Reading
January 2009
74 Not printed. Back
|
