Written evidence submitted by Kingston
University (TIC 22)
1. What is the Fraunhofer model and would
it be applicable to the UK?
1.1. The Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft model is that
of an applied or industry focused research and development centre
on an ambitious scale, funded by a blend of government grants
and private sector and government contract support. It is an integral
part of the German innovation system and has an annual research
budget of approximately €1.6 billion. Of this budget, €1.3
billion euros is generated through contract research (two thirds
is derived from contracts with industry and from publicly financed
research projects). One third is contributed by the German federal
and Länder governments in the form of institutional
funding.
1.2. The Fraunhofer platform encompasses more
than 80 research units (including 59 Fraunhofer Institutes) at
different locations in Germany, although there are research centers
and representative offices in Europe, USA, Asia and in the Middle
East. The Institutes are closely aligned with Germany's research
active universities and the Max-Planck Institutes (An independent
not-for-profit research organisation)
1.3. A key element of the German government's
high-tech strategy is to promote cluster initiatives and the Fraunhofer
network has the task of conceiving and implementing innovation
clusters. The purpose of innovation clusters is to pool the strengths
of a region and activate them to solve demanding tasks. In addition
to industry and universities, the networks include local non-university
research institutes that can make important contributions in relevant
thematic areas. Examples of Fraunhofer Innovation Clusters include
Adaptronic Systems, Darmstadt, Cloud Computing for Logistics,
Dortmund, Digital Commercial Vehicle Technology, Kaiserslautern
and Future Security BW, Freiburg.
1.4. Although Fraunhofer network could be applied
to the UK, there are a number of pre-existing structures and boundaries
that need to be acknowledged and taken into consideration in the
development of the TICs network. Arguably, there is an embryonic
Fraunhofer infrastructure emerging in the UK as a result of successive
rounds of Government support through mechanisms such as HEIF and
focused innovation funding via the Research Councils. For example
the Advanced Manufacturing Technologies for Photonics and Electronics
IKC, funded via EPSRC based at University of Cambridge.
1.5. Any development of Fraunhofer type structures
in the UK environment would have to take account of, and complement
existing R&D and innovation mechanisms and funding should
be deployed in a manner which provides additional investment for
some existing structures, and pump-priming for others. Therefore
an element of funding should be ring-fenced for competitive allocation.
In addition, a threshold of engagement should be agreed eg 30-40%
income from industrial partners which if not secured results in
a proportion of the core funding returned for re-deployment. In
essence, embed a financial claw-back system.
1.6. The significant scale of the Fraunhofer
network in Germany and the level of year-on-year national investment
mean that any UK development would initially be a fraction of
the size (assuming the £200 million proposed budget). Only
a limited number of specific initial investments could be made
on this basis and care should be taken to ensure that funding
is not spread to thinly within any UK network.
1.7. Care should be taken to ensure that the
UKs design thinking research expertise is taken into consideration
when formulating TIC components. This would enable some lesser
research intensive universities with pockets of research excellence
linked to the creative industries to engage with the innovation
agenda and for the UK global research base to access and utilise
the pockets of expertise that exists in such institutions without
dilution of critical mass funding. For example, the sustainable
materials resource library Kingston University.
1.8. It is not clear how the Local Enterprise
Partnerships will be able to contribute to the TICs in some areas,
especially if, as in the Greater London area, there is a question
about the availability of Regional Growth Funding to support development.
Until the full extent of the L.E.P & R.G.F. is known, the
TIC funding and leverage assumptions linked to regional development,
should be acknowledged but not incorporated into any funding model
until the future is clearer
2. Are there existing Fraunhofer-type research
centres within the UK, and if so, are they effective?
2.1. There are a number of existing UK university
research infrastructures that are similar to the Fraunhofer business
model, that is, large scale interaction with business. For example,
the Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre in Sheffield with Boeing
and Rolls Royce is a world-leading research centre dedicated to
developing innovative technology solutions for advanced materials,
cutting-edge technologies and providing practical solutions to
manufacturing problems.
3. What other models are there for research
centres oriented toward applications and results?
3.1. The Research Councils Innovation & Knowledge
Centres are indicative of the current model in a majority of HEIs
that is, significant funding won in competitive processes from
RCUK and other sources, working in conjunction with KT support
from central and/or devolved university collaborations.
3.2. In essence, high quality STEM research activities
tend to attract industrial contract research, collaboration and
co-investment which is closely aligned to the RCUK research priorities.
3.3. Previously the UK innovation system has
also included former Government research facilities such as those
of MoD/DERA. In that instance the loss of specific capabilities,
capacity and expertise which followed privatisation and the creation
of QinetiQ can be viewed as a key example of why on-going Government
co-investment is needed in order to maintain R&D resources
of national importance.
4. Whose role should it be to coordinate research
in a UK-wide network of innovation centres?
4.1. The coordination of the network should be
the Technology Strategy Board since it will need to be closely
aligned with the work of the Knowledge Transfer Networks (KTNs).
4.2. In addition to the coordination role, the
TSB should be responsible for ensuring the views of the following
constituents are taken into consideration as the TIC network emerges:
4.2.1. the Research Councils (not simply as part
of the pathways to impact agenda, but also as a mechanism to ensure
that Government R&D funding is strategically deployed);
4.2.2. UKTI as a means of calibrating the activities
with UK inward investment and global market demands;
4.2.3. the professional bodies representing the
staff responsible for the commercialisation of the applied research
in the HE sector (AURIL and PRAXISUNICO) as means of providing
sectoral insight on the global potential of the UK HE portfolio
to leverage venture funding;
4.2.4. Business leaders of Local Enterprise
Partnerships and Regional Growth Funds.
5. What effect would the introduction of Fraunhofer-type
institutes have on the work of Public Sector Research Establishments
and other existing research centres that undertake Government
sponsored research?
5.1. The German model tends to be one dimensional
/linked to a particular organisation/institution when the PSREs
look to bring various organisations - HEIs/companies etc - together
to collaborate often on an interdisciplinary basis e.g. the International
Space Innovation Centre (ISIC) at Harwell and the Cockcroft Institute
at Daresbury at which the partners are Universities of Lancaster,
Liverpool, Manchester, and the North West Development Agency).
5.2. There is a significant risk that UK Fraunhofers
might offer significant - and subsidised - competition to research
capabilities in PSREs and universities. Government would need
to ensure that the Fraunhofer or TIC offering in the UK is distinct
and builds on existing capacity, as opposed to duplicating it.
There is also a risk associated with any new offering supported
by significant Government funding out-competing existing research
providers and thereby disrupting their linkages with business
(potentially to the considerable detriment of the private sector
stakeholders)
DECLARATION OF
INTERESTS STATEMENT
Kingston University is a large multi-disciplinary
institution with 22,783 students that offers a broad spectrum
curriculum ranging from art and design to science and engineering.
For us, the main issues are that the contribution that design
thinking adds to the innovation process appears to be overlooked
in much of the literature coming out of Government and whilst
the proposed investment is welcome, it is debatable how effective
this will be given the scale of the TIC proposal.
Deborah Lock
Executive Director, Enterprise
Kingston University
November 2010
| 
