Written evidence submitted by the Surrey
Research Park, University of Surrey (TIC 60)
1. The Government has asked for views about Fraunhofer
Institutes. I am pleased to respond in relation to the question:
whose role should it be to coordinate research in a UK-wide network
of innovation centres?
2. The view of the Surrey Research Park about
Fraunhofer Institutes is that they are widely regarded as a success
and achieve in Germany some positive contributions to economic
development. However, in the UK what has developed over the last
30 years are a number of science and technology parks. These sites
champion an enterprise led innovation programme which engage SMEs
in the innovation system and have helped with the gradual reorientation
of some R&D institutes towards serving the emerging sector
of technology-intensive SME.
3. This evolution represents a shift in the way
innovation policy has been altered through the influence of real
operations on the ground from focusing on technology transfer
to an enterprise-based innovation system which utilize the business
skills to innovate.
4. Science parks such as the Surrey Research
Park see many innovative companies working at the forefront of
innovation using the array of interface programmes already in
place. They operate pre and full incubation, are involved in creating
networks such as Innovation and Growth teams that operate across
large sectors of business and with companies of different sizes,
are actively engaged with University Research and Enterprises
Units as well as supporting larger in a number of ways that are
a direct response to requests from business. These are effective
and do not need to be changed nor is there a need for another
initiative. The sensible approach is to build on current activities
rather than keep changing and trying "new" ideas.
5. The Surrey Research Park has also attracted
a number of R&D facilities from a number of international
organisations such as the Mitsubishi Research Centre which selected
this Park because of the excellence of work being conducted in
the University in its research base. Originally the centre located
on the Park because of the University's Virtual Centre of Excellence
in Mobile communications. These research activities far outweigh
the value of Fraunhofer Institutes. There should be more incentives
for industry to invest in their own open innovation R&D based
activities. This strategy is more likely to be productive.
6. The view of Surrey Research Park is that the
existing network of science and technology parks in the UK are
highly valuable and need equally as much support as new initiatives
such as the proposed Fraunhofer Institutes.
7. Most science parks in the UK are local initiatives
which have been established in response to local needs and strengths
but they work closely with national programmes such as KTPs, KTNs,
KTAs and the SBRI programme. It is suggested that the existing
framework for organising R&D through the Technology Strategy
Board is retained and that the links and support for existing
projects such as science and technology parks is enhanced rather
than pursue a raft of new initiatives. There is a view that KTPs
operate over too long a period for most companies of fewer than
100 people which is about the size where the companies of the
future are now beginning to be found. They are also too bureaucratic.
Shorter less bureaucratic versions of KTP's are needed. Also academics
are now so overworked they do not have time for dealing with the
business community—there have been about 10 requests from
the Surrey Research Park to work with university over the last
three years where academics cannot find the time to help because
of the funding system under which they labour.
8. It is suggested rather than create another
initiative it would be more sensible to stimulate industrial research
by dealing with the definition of R&D used by HMRI which appears
as being very narrow which is even difficult for UK tax professionals
to understand which means that they are complex for inward investors
and they are prone to interpretation by the HMR Inspectorate.
This uncertainty and lack of clarity in the definition needs to
be resolved. Also R&D is just one part of that process of
innovation and is not enough to build economic activity—tax
credits need to be available for innovation as well.
9. It is suggested in particular that the funding
gap is addressed on an immediate basis because there is a distinct
lack of funding to support SMEs that have innovative ideas and
products and they are finding it difficult to support shifting
from prototype to production without access to finance.
10. At the bottom end of the spectrum this relies
on angels but this strata of funding is relatively amateurish.
VC is insufficiently international in the UK which means the connection
into the wider international economy is weak which does not help
our companies. UK banks are very cautious and funds via loan guarantee
have excessive interest charges. There should be a greater focus
on private investors by providing greater tax incentives for individuals
to invest in business creation UK investors are all focussed on
the short term—the UK needs long term investment and this
can only come out of certainty on policy which currently does
not exist because predicting the next move in finance legislation
is very difficult. It is suggested that rather than come up with
new initiatives the government should provide greater incentive
for longer term investment through tax system exempting all capital
gains over say five to seven year period—potential benefits
from business creation outweigh any loss.
Dr Malcolm Parry OBE
Director of the Surrey Research Park
University of Surrey and current Chairman of the UK Science Park
Association
2 December 2010
| 
