Memorandum submitted by the Biotechnology
and Biological Sciences Research Council
Thank you for the opportunity to help devise
the scope of the above inquiry. The following is the response
from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
(BBSRC).
SUGGESTIONS FOR
THE SCOPE
OF THE
INQUIRY
BBSRC broadly endorses the issues raised in
responses from our sponsored institutes, such as Rothamsted Research
and the Institute for Animal Health. The following are important
issues from the perspective of the BBSRC Executive:
— Defra's responsibility to help maintain
the research base upon which it depends: The "RIPSS"
report[13]
sets out Government policy that fitness for purpose and sustainability
of the research base is the joint responsibility of the principal
public funders (Research Councils, government departments). Defra
funds a significant amount of research in BBSRC institutes, but
is reluctant to recognise its shared responsibility for their
long-term sustainability.[14]
The nature of research is such that it can not be switched on
and off as short-term policy and budget needs dictate. Unless
the RIPSS principles are adopted, Defra's science capability will
be damaged by loss of continuity, key expertise and facilities.
— The funding of Defra science:
Defra funds science mostly as short-term 1-3 year contracts. This
may be appropriate in some cases, but sustainability (above) and
Defra's science capability would be greatly improved by a longer-term
planning horizon offered by five-year (or longer) programmes of
research, particularly in the area of sustainable agriculture
and land use. Defra considers that it is unable to fund beyond
each three-year spending review, while other departments do not
take this view. The committee might consider why this is.
— The prioritisation of Defra science:
The committee may also wish to explore how Defra science is prioritised
and its current balance. Although Defra is responding to budget
cuts we question the scale of its shift from Sustainable Food
and Farming research to the area of Environment & Climate
Change. Whilst the latter is important, and attractive to Ministers,
the Government's own Chief Scientist has warned that the UK faces
an enormous challenge to maintain agricultural productivity as
climate change bites and the population grows. Good long-term
agricultural science is essential to underpin food security, yet
it is exactly this area from which Defra is now withdrawing.
Also, Defra's current consultation on responsibility
and cost sharing in Animal Health and Welfare[15]
proposed that the farming industry could provide research funding
(through levies) to continue support of areas that Defra is withdrawing
from. How viable is this?
— Defra's internal structures are opaque:
Defra's science capability largely depends on interaction with
the research base and other funders such as BBSRC. However, this
is inhibited by the devolved nature of Defra's science, where
research budgets are held by disparate policy groups. Researchers
and funders find Defra difficult to penetrate. How might this
be improved to benefit Defra's science?
March 2008
13 Research Council Institute and PSRE Sustainability
Study ('RIPSS') (DTI, 2004): http://www.dti.gov.uk/science/science-funding/ripss/page22675.html Back
14
See oral evidence from Hon Lord Rooker and Professor Howard Dalton
to House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee Inquiry
into "Research Council Institutes" http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmsctech/68/6110108.htm. Back
15
See http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/ahw-nextsteps/index.htm Back
|
