Letter from the Chief Scientific Adviser,
Professor Robert T Watson, to Rt Hon Michael Jack, Chair, EFRA
Select Committee
Thank you for the session on 17 March which
discussed Defra's Evidence Investment Strategy. I found the seminar-style
approach a useful format for exploring the range of issues raised
by the Committee, the panel and the audience.
As agreed, I attach responses to those questions
which we did not have time to answer at the session. As we are
now in the election period I have kept the language as neutral
as possible.
Professor Robert Watson
12 April 2010
DEFRA'S RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS OUTSTANDING
FROM THE SEMINAR ON DEFRA SCIENCE, 17 MARCH 2010
STRATEGIC AND
INVESTMENT PRIORITIES
From: Miss Gurpreet Padda, Policy Adviser, Common
Fisheries Policy, Defra
Given the forthcoming budgetary constraints
is it prudent to be issuing a new science strategy when we aren't
clear about where funding will be coming from? I'm unsure whether
we can make evidence based decision making when the people collecting
and compiling the evidence are dwindling as a result of the above.
It is always important to review the Department's
policy needs and decide on what our priorities are (page 28 of
the strategy). This prioritisation can be adapted to changing
circumstances and budgets. The strategy includes consideration
of developing and organising the right skills, expertise and capabilities
and identifying external expertise we can draw on. Defra also
works with other departments and the Research Councils to identify
and fund the research required for evidence-based policy-making.
From: Professor Bill Reilly, President, British
Veterinary Association
It has been noted by the British Veterinary
Association that whilst Defra's R&D budget has remained fairly
constant over the last few years the proportion allocated to animal
health and welfare has been substantially cut. With reduced investment
into government research laboratories, how well prepared is the
Defra for future disease outbreaks?
It is the case that there has been a decline
in the overall annual investment expenditure on research and development
on animal health and welfare topics. This has been a consequence
of the re-ordering of priorities across the wide range of business
undertaken by Defra and the rationale for doing so has been set
out in some detail in the Evidence Investment Strategy which was
published earlier this year www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/science/how/strategy.htm
From: Professor George Marshall, Assistant Principal,
Scottish Agricultural College
(a) How does Defra propose to work
with the Research Councils and other major research funders in
the UK to produce a strategically coherent approach to address
the major challenges that face agriculture, food security and
the environment?
Defra works with the major UK research funders,
including the Research Councils at a strategic level to produce
an approach to address these challenges through its membership
of and participation in the Environmental Research Funders Forum,
the Living with Environmental Change Programme and more specifically
in the development of the new BBSRC-led joint Research Council
and government department programme on Global Food Security.
(b) How does Defra propose to structure
its research funding to introduce greater flexibility in contract
arrangements to gain maximum advantage from EU funding opportunities?
Defra can maximise the benefits from EU research
funding through influencing the development of the annual work
programmes in FP7 and benefit from the added-value of projects
funded by the Community. EU funding also provides benefits by
supporting the coordination of national research programmes through
mechanisms such as the ERA-NETs. Defra is active in such networks.
(c) How will Defra make sure that the
success of the LINK research programmes is at least maintained
in the new arrangements through TSB across all sectors including
livestock?
LINK Programmes were run under the auspices
of the former DTI. The Technology Strategy Board (TSB) is the
successor to DTI in the role of supporting collaborative research
and development and exploitation of technology and innovation
for the benefit of UK businesses. The TSB's collaborative funding
is designed, as was LINK to be "business support", with
proposals responding to requirements or challenges identified
by the industry. Industry can submit proposals to the competitions
announced, with an appropriate business case and research contractors,
and may be able to build on previous LINK successes. The first
call, on crop protection, is in progress and will provide experience
on how future calls, including those relevant to livestock, will
operate.
FOOD SCIENCE
From: Mr Wyndham Rogers-Coltman, OBE
In the same way that science has a major
role to play in alleviating the effects of climate change so it
has a major role to play in assuring the sustainability and affordability
of food supplies. Would Defra agree with me that the development
of new husbandry techniques and food producing plants and animals
which require less water, are more resistant to disease and are
more productive, whilst requiring less inputs of chemicals and
fertilisers, is essential to the survival of the human race and
the environment in which we live? If they do agree with me, will
they ensure that increased freedom is given to scientists in their
work in developing such scientific advances and that, where the
work is to the national benefit, financial support is made available
to ensure that the work can be carried out?
New husbandry techniques and food producing
plants and animals which require less water, are more resistant
to disease and are more productive, whilst requiring less inputs
of chemicals and fertilisers, are essential for long-term environmental,
social and economic sustainability. A significant amount of research
is already being conducted in these areas, and the recently released
UK Cross-Government Food Research and Innovation Strategy addresses
these issues. The academic community has the freedom to follow
whatever lines of research are interesting and likely to succeed—subject
to availability of funds and success in the peer-review of their
proposals.
From: Jill Sanders
I would like to ask the Committee if it would
be prepared to conduct an assessment of the value of the contribution
gardeners make to the food supply? This could be conducted through
both individuals and allotment societies, where those participating
could engage plot holders and review crops and methods. It would
be valuable to have some idea of how much this kind of local production might
meet the need for supplying food to families.
The question of a further assessment is for
the Committee to respond to however, Defra has done some work
in this area as described below.
Defra's Family Food report[18]
provides an estimate of the contribution gardeners make to the
food supply. According to this report average amounts of fresh
fruit and fresh vegetables entering the household per week in
2008 were estimated at 790 and 1,294 grams per person per week.
In further analysing the data it is possible to determine that
2.4% of fruit and 3.3% of vegetables were home grown either in
a garden or allotment.
Food security has various dimensions, including
global availability / markets and global resources sustainability
(see the UK Food Security Assessment:
http://defraweb/foodfarm/food/pdf/food-assess100105.pdf).
The EFRA committee report "Securing food supplies up to 2050:
the challenges faced by the UK" stated that iIn terms of
overall production, the trends of increasing enthusiasm among
consumers for buying food that is local to a particular area of
the UK, and also for growing their own food "are a small
contribution to a huge challenge, but they are a way of reconnecting
people with food production and have an important part to play
in encouraging the sort of changes in consumer behaviour that
will be necessary for a sustainable system of food production."
From: Molly Conisbee, Campaigns and Communications
Director, Soil Association
In the light of the findings of the IAASTD
report, published in 2008, and chaired by Professor Watson, what
plans do DEFRA have for funding research into agro-ecological
farming systems, which have historically fared rather badly in
comparison to biotech funding?
The need to produce food whilst responding to
the challenge of maintaining ecosystem services and biodiversity
and the need for research to support this was recognised in the
UK Cross-Government Food Research and Innovation strategy,[19]
published in January 2010.
Agro-ecological systems research is funded through
Defra's Sustainable Farming Systems and Biodiversity programme
and currently focuses on developing solutions to trade-offs and
conflicts, within the farming system as a whole and provides evidence
to reduce the negative environmental footprint of agriculture
and enhance the environment and biodiversity associated with farmland,
within a sustainable farming context. This includes the development
of improved varieties or breeds with better characteristics which
are important to developing farming systems in tackling environmental
and climate change concerns.
Defra's remit encompasses applied strategic
and applied specific research. The Biotechnology and Biological
Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) leads on basic biotechnology
research in relation to the food system.
NON-NATIVE
SPECIES
11. From: Dr Neil McRoberts, Reader in Systems
Ecology, Systems Analysis Team Leader, Land Economy & Environment
Research Group, SAC
Why is an error-ridden UK non-native species
risk assessment scheme still being used as the basis of UK non-native
risk assessment, and still publicly available for downloading
from the non-native species risk assessment panel web pages, when
both Defra and the scientists responsible for developing the methodology
have been informed of its serious technical faults and that it
cannot provide transparent, meaningful evidence of invasive risk
or potential economic impact?
The GB (formerly UK) Non-native Species Risk
Assessment Scheme has been under development since 2004. In its
original version (dated 2005) several approaches were proposed
to demonstrate the overall risk posed by a species. These included
an approach described as `conditional probability'. We believe
that this is the part of the scheme that Dr McRoberts is referring
to in his question.
To ensure the scheme was robust it was peer
reviewed through a research project in 2006 and the recommendations
from this project were implemented in a second project that concluded
in 2008. This latter project resulted in an upgrading of the scheme
in conjunction with EPPO[20]
and the conditional probability calculation was completely removed
from the new scheme. It is this new scheme that is now being used
by all risk assessors completing risk assessments as part of the
GB Non-native Species Risk Analysis Mechanism. The scheme closely
follows the EPPO plant health scheme, which is recognised throughout
Europe.
It must be stressed that the conditional probability
approach was a minor component of the scheme which has not been
used in practice and was in no way the basis on which risk was
presented. It should also be noted that each risk assessment is
peer reviewed by an independent expert and then scrutinised by
a panel of risk assessment experts until the panel deems it fit-for-purpose.
All risk assessments are then published on the website of the
GB Non-native Species Secretariat[21]
for public comment for a three-month period and all relevant comments
are sent to the risk assessor to address.
The out of date manual has now been removed
from the internet pages to avoid confusion. Defra is developing
new guidance for risk assessors to replace this manual.
FUNGHI
From: Dr David W. Minter, President, European
Mycological Association
Fungi are not animals or plants, but belong
in their own totally separate biological kingdom. Their importance
in providing ecosystem services is enormous, and therefore they
are major factors impacting on climate change, food security and
other environmental issues. A recent House of Lords select committee
identified mycology, the scientific discipline for fungi, as being
the most endangered area of taxonomy (50% of the very few remaining
British systematic mycologists reach retirement age within the
next two years). Defra's Evidence Investment Strategy 2010-2013
contains no reference to fungi.
Has Defra's Evidence Investment Strategy
2010-2013 overlooked the fungi?
We recognise that fungi are important for ecosystems
services, climate change and food security and although Defra
does not have an individual programme on fungi (which is why it
is not considered specifically in the Strategy) programmes such
as the Rural Development Programme for England include work on
the association of mycorrhizal fungi with key plants in species-rich
grassland.
GENERAL
From: Mark Yoxon, Liaison Officer, Environment,
Communications & Systems Department, MCT Faculty, Open
University
(A) How can we make research outcomes
relevant and accessible to groups whose modus operandi puts them
in direct contact with citizens so they can be effective agents
of change?
Context: Building from our own partnership
working, we feel wider communication issues are paramount. For
example, making research accessible to groups who might not have
the capacity to assimilate direct research outcomes into their
day to day working but do have requirements to absorb research
outcomes into their modus operandi. Often such groups are at the
sharp end of implementation, in direct contact with citizens and
so are important agents of change.
Defra agrees that making research outcomes accessible
to intermediaries who work directly with those the Department
is trying to reach is important and Defra does this in a number
of ways ranging from involvement on research steering groups through
to development of tools which help organisations work with aspects
of our evidence base. For example intermediaries are very important
in working with farmers. In terms of climate change key people
are involved in the research as it progresses (so they can help
steer the research). One Defra project looking at climate change
mitigation for agriculture has groups such as DairyCo and the
umbrella body for farm advisors on the steering group. Linked
to this research the Department is reviewing / mapping advice
provision.
Developing an evidence base that is accessible
to other organisations is key to the work of the Sustainable Behaviours
Unit (SBU) in Defra. The programme of work provides a broad understanding
of current behaviours, how to influence behaviour to more pro-environmental
actions, the motivations and barriers to change and what will
best achieve change at a household level. Research also includes
piloting and testing innovative approaches to encourage pro-environmental
behaviour through a programme of Action Based Research, small-scale
piloting and through the Greener Living Fund (a third sector grant
funding programme). Developing an evidence base that is accessible
to other organisations is key to the work, for example, external
stakeholders are often part of project steering groups or invited
to dissemination events. SBU has developed tools to help other
organisations work with aspects of the evidence base, for example
toolkits for both qualitative and quantitative research to recruit
to the Defra segmentation models.
(B) What wider UK mechanisms can Defra encourage
to foster linkages across research agencies to extend the reach
of applied research carried out by higher education research institutions?
Context: Although encouraged, by for example
Defra, communication across research agencies is not always adequate.
For example we know of waste managers in local authorities who
had telephone calls across a week or so from different research
agencies, all of whom wanted their time and input into several
separate but linked projects. Other than those projects with direct
relevance to the funded research it is often challenging and beyond
the scope for a single research group to coordinate a wider and
often diverse set of research activities.
Defra is a member of and works in partnership
with programmes such as Environmental Research Funders Forum (ERFF)
and Living with Environmental Change (LWEC), as well as working
with the research councils. These partnerships promote co-operative
working and knowledge sharing including across research agencies.
From: Richard Bruce
As stated recently by a wise scientist specialising
in physics and the universe there are no absolutely proven laws
of physics because science is always evolving. I would add that
in chemistry science is still discovering new properties even
for water, the most abundant material on the planet. I would therefore
suggest that there is no such thing as "Sound Science"
because science is continuously evolving and it is positively
dangerous to suggest that current scientists know all that there
is to know, or that their opinions are wholly reliable in the
decision making process. "Scientists prove that scientists
disprove what scientists prove". Worse than this, too many
scientists depend on theory and wrongly dismiss evidence that
fails to fit that theory. They are often well rewarded for such
attitudes by industry. This I would suggest is extremely dangerous.
Some of our greatest inventions, and much of the scientific knowledge
base, has been provided by people outside of the scientific community
with no formal scientific training. Sadly, despite the value of
their knowledge to mankind, they were often destroyed by the scientific
establishment.
Scientific knowledge is always evolving—that
is the nature of scientific inquiry. "Sound Science"
does not mean that scientists know all that there is to know.
It includes informing policymakers what is known, what is not
known, what the key uncertainties are, and what the implications
of uncertainty are for policy formulation and implementation.
Many scientists depend on theory and wrongly dismiss evidence
that fails to fit that theory. A good scientist will examine both
the evidence, which can be wrong, and the theory, which can be
wrong.
From: Lynne Jones MP
(1) Should you have taken a backwards
look to see whether there have been capabilities lost through
the short-term decisions?
Previous decisions on investment in research
and development were made with the best information at the time,
recognizing budgetary limitations. A decline in one budget does
not necessarily mean a fall in research funding overall: whilst
the Defra evidence budget declined, the budget for agricultural
research in BBSRC increased significantly. Therefore, close coordination
and collaboration among Government Departments and Research Councils
is essential when making decisions that impact on an overall UK
capability.
(2) Are there any capabilities that
ought to be reconsidered and what are the implications for the
future?
As part of the department's prioritisation exercises,
individual programmes have been assessed (see page 28, Table 2*).
(3) Is Advocating greater risk wise when
you will possibly be in a financially constrained situation?
The strategy does not advocate taking greater
risks.
* Defra's Evidence Investment Strategy: 2010-13 and
beyond.
18 Defra's Family Food report is based on the Family
Food Module of the Living Costs and Food Survey which was previously
called the Expenditure and Food Survey. It is an annual voluntary
sample survey of private households. Each individual aged over
7 in the household keeps a diary of daily expenditure for two
weeks. Free food entering the household is also recorded on the
diaries. Information gathered on food purchase includes food brought
home, takeaway meals eaten at home and food consumed away from
home with a very detailed breakdown of food expenditure. Back
19
http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/goscience/c/cross-government-food-research-strategy.pdf Back
20
EPPO is the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation,
whose risk assessment methodology provides the basis of the GB
Scheme. EPPO risk assessments are internationally recognised documents
and are, for example, accepted by the World Trade Organisation
as a valid basis for imposing restrictions on imports. www.eppo.org Back
21
www.nonnativespecies.org Back
| 
