Memorandum submitted by the Royal Geographical
Society (FC 76)
1. The Royal Geographical Society (with
The Institute of British Geographers) is the learned society and
professional body for geography. Formed in 1830, our Royal Charter
of 1859 is for "the advancement of geographical science".
We have more than 15,000 members and Fellows, of which a substantial
number are academics and other researchers whose work we support
through a range of activities. Our academic activities include
holding the largest geographical conference in Europe, publishing
three journals, one of which (Transactions of the IBG) is the
top ranked geographical journal in the world, hosting research
groups and providing funding opportunities for researchers at
all careers stages.
2. As a discipline, geography is uniquely
placed within the debate on science and scientific research, as
a subject that combines physical science with social science and
humanities. Since many of the scientific environmental issues
facing the world have their causes and solutions in societal and
individual behaviours, geography occupies a key research niche.
It spans both SET[110]
and non-SET funded areas in scope. The discipline is at the forefront
of the tensions between SET and non-SET funding streams and suffers
from the inadequate manner in which such "interdisciplinary"
subjects are funded.
3. The Society strongly recommends that
before cutting/restricting science, engineering and technology
(SET) designation/funding, the current arbitrary decisions on
what is/is not SET classified need to be reconsidered. When it
suits government geography is classed as a science; and vice-versa.
A recent example of physical geography being considered SET is
in skills and training.[111]
However, currently it is funded entirely as a non-SET subject,
which is placing unacceptable strains on properly resourcing the
science-base of the discipline. It should be recognised for what
it is, a part-STEM subject, and funded accordingly and with STEM
protection for its 50% science component.
4. HEFCE has publicly stated that there
are inconsistencies of funding scientific research at the STEM:
non-STEM boundary. The same piece of science conducted from a
Geography department attracts substantially less QR resource than
had it been conducted from an Environmental Science department
or another STEM designated subject. Thus the true costs of conducting
quality science are not being covered under the non-STEM funding
for geography. Unless the STEM lottery can be addressed, further
reductions in UK Science and Innovation, in an area that is increasingly
being profiled by NERC and others as important to the nation—the
environmental sciences—seem inevitable. Geography makes
a substantial contribution to research in the environmental sciences.
5. As the learned society representing and
promoting the discipline we have sought evidence and considered
opinions about the position of geography from across the academic
community, including all departments of geography in the UK, our
Fellows and members, and the Society's research groups. Much of
this evidence has also contributed to our response to the recent
HEFCE consultation on the Research Excellence Framework (REF).
6. That evidence has shown the important
contribution of geography to science-based research
6. (a) The formal report of the Geography
and Environmental Studies Panel in RAE 2008, concluded that 50%
of geographical scholarship is scientific work—environmental
science—of high quality. Science-based geographers are publishing
in the same journals as other environmental scientists and attract
as much research grant income per capita.
6. (b) Evidence of sustained, even increased,
emphasis on the science base of Geography can be seen in the level
of SRIF investment that occurred in the 2001-08 period, and is
explicitly referenced in the RA5a returns for the 2008 RAE. In
total, this reveals at least £30.7 million of SRIF investment
in laboratory facilities and the scientific equipment needed as
research infrastructure to support research-active staff working
in Geography on environmental research. This figure is directly
comparable to Earth Systems and Environmental Science, for which
the total revealed SRIF investment was at least £34.4 million.
6. (c) Geographers work on some of the
key environmental and societal issues challenging policy today:
including climate change, its causes and effects, at local, regional
and international scales; fluvial processes and flooding; glacier
dynamics and processes of accelerated melting; and sustainable
development. Specific examples of STEM related work by geographers
include groups working at the core of international efforts to
measure rates of sea level change (Durham, Plymouth); assessing
environmental degradation in lake systems (UCL, Loughborough);
developing polar and alpine ice mass models to understand how
they link to global environmental systems (Cambridge, Edinburgh,
Aberystwyth); understanding rates of abrupt climate change and
how environmental processes and humans respond (RHUL, UCL); interfacing
with climate modellers to develop Earth System Science models
(Bristol); and mapping how humans have altered vegetation patterns
and cover (Oxford, Southampton). This research has economic as
well as environmental, social, cultural, and policy value and
impact.
Examples of economic value from geographical science
research
7. While it remains difficult to put a precise
economic value on the impact of research in most cases, some geographical
science research can be clearly linked to economic benefits. Among
the many examples are: Professor John Thornes' (Geography, Birmingham)
development of new technologies in the measurement, mapping and
modelling of ice on road/railways has led to substantial reductions
in the "cost" of road accidents, more efficient applications
of salt and grit by local authorities, and the formation of two
private spin-off companies (Thermal Mapping International). Estimates
of the cost benefit suggest the new system saves £3,224 million
(2006 prices) per year in the UK.[112]
Dr Kevin Tansey and Professor Heiko Balzter's (Geography, Leicester),
work on G-STEP (GMES Space and Technology Exchange Partnership),
which supports and speeds up the use of Earth Observation (EO)
data and information services, both by businesses and policy makers.
Dr Hannah Cloke's (Geography, King's College London) development
of an early flood warning system has been demonstrated successfully
in the Upper Severn catchment in the UK and subsequently applied
in the Upper Huai catchment in China.
Balance of science and social science/humanities
research in Geography
8. Geography has long been recognized as
a part-science discipline. It has been assigned, for example,
a subject cost-weighting for research for a "part-laboratory"
subject. At 1.3, this weighting is mid-way between that for social
science/humanities subjects at 1.0, and science subjects at 1.6.
This accurately reflects the evidenced 50/50 split in geography
research between natural science and social sciences/humanities
and recognizes the significant laboratory-based research needs
in physical geography and IT needs of modelling and sophisticated
applications of GIS. A similar approach applies to support for
teaching.
The only circumstances in which this does not
apply is in the HEFCE allocated research funding—where geography
is not STEM recognized and does not receive STEM funding
9. This needs to be rectified with the physical
science research within Geography being afforded STEM designation,
in a similar manner to Environmental Science, thus protecting
the breadth of the environmental science research base, especially
at a time when the environmental issues that physical geographers
are working on are some of the most pressing ones facing society
and government. Published evidence demonstrates that there is
a 50:50 balance between research which is physical geography and
human geography (including social science environmental studies),
and it would be appropriate to provide 50% STEM protection to
Geography.
10. Thus, in conclusion:
(a) Before even considering cuts in STEM funding,
it is critical that there is a level playing field and those subjects
that rightfully deserve part STEM funding are recognized and funded
as such.
(b) In our view all STEM areas, including physical
geography, are important, as are both blue-skies research and
more directly applied research. We see no robust, future-proof
and readily identifiable basis on which one area of STEM research
should or could be chosen above another for cutting. All should
be treated equally and, if cuts are to be made, these should be
the same across the board.
(c) The needs of science must be balanced with
the needs of social science too. While funding needs for social
science research are less, so too is the current budget allocation
to social science research. Research issues relating to crime,
social cohesion, employment, the environment, sustainable lifestyles,
security, economic development and many more demand quality social
science research. Robbing Peter to pay Paul will not foster a
strong and vibrant UK research base as a whole.
Royal Geographical Society
January 2010
110 We use STEM and SET interchangeably. Back
111
Government commissioned CRAC to survey university students in
STEM subjects, including geography and land-based sciences, about
their careers thinking. Back
112
Economic benefits of environmental science. A study of the economic
impacts of research funded by the Natural Environment Research
Council November 2006. Back
|
