Technology Innovation Centres

Written evidence submitted by The Russell Group (TIC 69)

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION CENTRES

A. The Russell Group is an association of 20 major UK research-intensive universities. Russell Group universities undertake high levels of business interaction, and host a number of research centres which embody characteristics of Fraunhofer research centres. These research centres undertake applied and collaborative research with business partners, support technology development, as well as providing incubators for spin-out companies and small high-tech start-ups. [1]

B. In 2008/9 [2] , 77% of HEIs whose contract research with commercial businesses was worth over £5M were Russell Group universities. In the same year, Russell Group universities received £283M of income from UK, EU and other overseas industry, and accounted for:

· 68% of the total income from contract research to UK universities.

· 53% of the total income from collaborative research involving both public funding and funding from businesses to UK universities.

C. The Russell Group wishes to highlight the following key points in response to the questions of the committee on Technology Innovation Centres (TICs):

i. Given the differences between the research landscapes in the UK and Germany, too close an adherence to the Fraunhofer model as it operates in Germany is unlikely to be the best fit to meet the needs of the UK. Successful innovation requires taking into account the context and environment within which research is undertaken, generated, and exploited. Nevertheless, a discussion of ways in which Fraunhofer-style activities might be carried out by universities themselves would be welcome.

ii. To address the UK’s needs for accelerating technology and innovation, there is real value in building on the strengths, competitive advantage and capacity of the existing research base. In a time of very limited public funding, resources should be focused on supporting existing centres of excellence , ensuring they are best meeting the needs of business, and making a maximum contribution to the UK’s innovation, productivity and growth performance. Consideration needs to be given to the long-term sustainability of any existing or new centres that are funded, taking into account issues such as long-term ownership, ongoing technology refresh programmes and if needed, decommissioning costs.

iii. Investments should be complementary to, rather than competing with, the current capabilities of the UK’s research base, and considered on a national (rather than regional) scale. Resources should be focused where there is most competitive advantage to be gained from integrating research, teaching and translation.

iv. The Government will need to consider what the focus of a TIC should be – applied research, development activities, knowledge transfer, support for venture capital, or all of the above? Different TICs may also need to adopt different approaches or mixes of activities, depending on the area of technology it covers – a one size fits all approach will not be appropriate.

v. The Government will need to consider how the TICs fit within the existing research environment in terms of generation of research, alongside research-intensive universities and other research institutes, and also how the TICs will work alongside the technology transfer offices, companies and other knowledge transfer functions embedded in universities. Existing successful centres are often closely associated with, or even embedded within, universities which have a critical mass of excellent research and teaching, and a proven track record of translation.

vi. There is scope for exploring whether there are alternative models to Fraunhofer-type research centres, and what methods exist to improve coordination and cooperation between existing centres, research-intensive universities and business. For example, a TIC may benefit greatly from a leading ‘university as host’ mechanism. The university could offer co-location of academic and industry researchers in the hosting of nationally important physical assets, and be tasked with integrating resources through its network of associated centres of excellence, and managing communication with industry partners. This model would extend the reach into higher technology readiness levels beyond which some existing centres typically operate.

1. What is the Fraunhofer model and would it be applicable to the UK?

1.1 The UK research and innovation landscape is very different from that in Germany. In the UK, world-class research-intensive universities undertake a much broader range of research activities than in Germany, including basic research, applied R&D, long-term strategic research, interdisciplinary research and technology development services. Complementary R&D activities are undertaken in independent research institutes. These include the Wellcome Funded Sanger Institute, Research Council Institutes, Government laboratories, technology intermediaries, R&D consultancies and in company R&D laboratories.

1.2 In Germany, the roles of organisations within the research base are highly differentiated and largely discrete. For example, universities focus on higher education and basic research, and Fraunhofer Institutes undertake applied R&D and provide technology development services. In addition, Helmholtz Research Centres focus on long-term strategic research on issues of national importance in areas such as energy, health, space, transport and the environment, and Max Planck institutes focus on specific areas of cutting-edge interdisciplinary research and large-scale research facilities.

1.3 Recently, Germany has been aiming to boost research and quality standards at individual universities, and focussing on clusters of research excellence. This is motivated by a desire to improve Germany’s international competitiveness; the World Bank has noted that Germany’s universities are ‘hardly recognized as elite institutions [3] ’ and trail behind the UK’s world-class universities.

1.4 The research and innovation funding landscapes, composition of research-intensive businesses, and nature of university-business relationships also differ significantly between the UK and Germany. In the UK, world-class universities have strong and established relationships with business, whereas in Germany it is the Fraunhofer institutes which have strong links to business. Universities in Germany are subject to rules governing their engagement with entrepreneurial activities, which restricts their ability to engage with business and secure industry funding . We have an opportunity to examine whether activities that are carried out by discrete institutes in Germany might be carried out within UK universities, exploiting the culture changes that have already resulted from decades of government investment.

1.5 Given the differences between the research landscapes in the UK and Germany, too close an adherence to the Fraunhofer model as it operates in Germany is unlikely to be the best fit to meet the needs of the UK. As the OECD has noted, attempts to transplant elements of productive innovation systems from other economies are usually unsuccessful . [4] The response to falling behind in a race should not be to return to the start line and try a new strategy while our competitors forge even farther ahead. Rather it is to build on the training we have already done and adapt to new conditions. Successful innovation requires taking into account the context and environment within which research is undertaken, generated, and exploited. The UK’s world-class universities are embedded, and at the heart of, the national innovation system, whereas Germany’s innovation system relies on a much more dispersed number of players who generate research.

1.6 The Government has announced that a network of Technology and Innovation Centres (TICs) will support businesses in developing and commercialising new technology. It will be crucial to ensure the TICs do not duplicate effort and are joined up with the existing infrastructure and initiatives. It will be necessary to clarify the goals of the TICs and the mix of research and innovation related activities it will undertake. For example, what would the focus of a TIC be – applied research, development activities, knowledge transfer, support for venture capital, or all of the above?

1.7 Different TICs may need to adopt different approaches or mixes of activities, depending on the area of technology it covers – a one size fits all approach will not be appropriate. There is a need to ensure continuity of research development from the fundamental research undertaken within universities, through to full-scale commercial product/process. TICs should aim to maximise their position in the product/process development cycle, by supporting a balanced combination of industrially-driven challenges and university-catalysed innovation.

1.8 In setting up the TICs, and considering their goals and focus, the Government will need to consider the following:

1.8.1 How the TICs will fit within the existing research environment in terms of generation of research, alongside research-intensive universities and other research institutes. Russell Group universities host many research centres focused on more applied and collaborative research undertaken with business partners, as well as incubators for spin-out companies and small high-tech start-ups;

1.8.2 How the TICs will work alongside the technology transfer offices, companies and other knowledge transfer functions embedded in universities. Russell Group universities can point to a strong track record in technology exploitation, often via dedicated technology transfer companies, such as UCL Business, Cambridge Enterprise, Isis Innovations (Oxford), Alta Innovations Ltd (Birmingham), King’s College Business Ltd and Imperial Innovations Ltd;

1.8.3 How the TICs will fit alongside Technology Strategy Board initiatives involving business, such as innovation platforms, Knowledge Transfer Partnerships and collaborative R&D, and also other initiatives that aim to support business (for example, the London Technology Network).

1.9 Industrial R&D spend in the UK is much less than our competitors in Europe, and what there is, is concentrated in two sectors (aerospace and pharmaceuticals) dominated by a small number of large companies. The Government should consider carefully whether it wishes to focus on maintaining the status quo, or ensuring that TICs encourage new entrants to the marketplace, and companies operating in new sectors. Universities are well placed to provide open innovation collaborative environments that support new and growing high-tech companies, in addition to the established players. Growth in competition and innovation in all sectors is likely to be of benefit to the UK in the long run.

1.10 The Government should also consider how the TICs will address wider issues in the commercialisation of research and development of technologies through their early stages. Proof of concept funding, established by funding from Scottish Enterprise and the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF), has been highly beneficial in developing Russell Group research into commercially successful technologies. [5] This funding , and its Scottish equivalent Knowledge Transfer Grant, has also enabled our universities to expand and strengthen their technology transfer activities, employing highly skilled business professionals, through which administrative, technical and financial support can be provided to support the progression of new spin-out companies and development of technologies through their early stages.

1.11 In spite of existing sources of proof of concept funding, there remains a shortage of funds to help very early stage technologies to be developed to the point where they are able to attract funding from venture capital trusts or other investors, or can be established as a viable licensing proposition for external businesses.

1.12 The Russell Group would support further investment in existing proof of concept funds and exploring ideas around the potential for a national proof of concept fund, which would be managed by successful institutions. In particular it could be valuable to align part of this funding with the TICs.

2. Are there existing Fraunhofer -type research centres within the UK, and if so, are they effective?

2.1 Russell Group universities host a number of research centres which embody characteristics of Fraunhofer research centres, in that they undertake applied and collaborative research with business partners, support technology development, as well as providing incubators for spin-out companies and small high-tech start-ups. Below are examples of centres that have been particularly effective in working with industry (additional information on each centre is provided in the Annex):

· Centre for Plastic Electronics, Imperial College London and the Cambridge Integrated Knowledge Centre, University of Cambridge

· Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh

· Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, University of Sheffield

· The Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, University of Manchester and University of Sheffield

· National Composites Centre, Bristol

· WMG, University of Warwick

· GSK Clinical Imaging Centre, Imperial College London

· Centre for Materials Discovery, University of Liverpool

· Biopharmaceutical processing, Newcastle University

· Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton

· High Performance Computing Wales, Cardiff University in collaboration with other Welsh HEIs

· Institute of Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (ECIT) at Queen’s University Belfast

· KNT, University of Glasgow

2.2 Russell Group universities support businesses in developing and commercialising new technologies in a variety of other ways, including:

· Technology exploitation via technology transfer offices, or often via dedicated technology transfer companies. These companies invest in businesses based on IP from research undertaken in the university, and in some cases in other IP rich companies with excellent commercial potential. An example includes Imperial Innovations, which in 2008/9 invested over £14M in 20 companies, and external investment in its portfolio of companies was £41M in 2008/9, rising to £75M in 2009/10.

· Provision of various kinds of incubation facilities for new companies, along with investment and knowledge transfer support. Examples include the University of Warwick, which has a virtual tenancies programme that allows emerging companies to access the support and facilities at Warwick’s science park without having to physically relocate.

· Incentives to access research expertise. Most Russell Group universities have knowledge transfer secondment programmes in place. In addition, the universities of Nottingham , Glasgow and Newcastle have awarded local businesses thousands of pounds worth of "innovation vouchers", enabling small companies to access research expertise through consultancy or collaborative projects.

3. What other models are there for research centres oriented toward applications and results?

3.1 To address the UK’s needs for accelerating technology and innovation we believe there is real value in building on the strengths, competitive advantage and capacity of the existing research base. The Russell Group believes that in a time of very limited public funding, resources should be focussed on supporting existing centres of excellence, ensuring they are best meeting the needs of business, and making a maximum contribution to the UK’s innovation, productivity and growth performance.

3.2 If the Government wishes to establish new TICs, outside of existing centres of excellence, the Russell Group believes that existing national research capability and national need should be examined closely. A smaller number of focused, high quality centres would provide greater value for money and make a greater difference to the UK’s innovation performance, than a system of more widely dispersed centres.

3.3 We also believe there is scope for exploring whether there are alternative models to Fraunhofer-type research centres, and what methods exist to improve coordination and cooperation between existing centres, research-intensive universities and business.

3.4 For example, a TIC could make use of a ‘university as host’ mechanism. The university could offer co-location of academic and industry researchers in the hosting of nationally important physical assets, and be tasked with integrating resources through its network of associated centres of excellence, and managing feedback loops and communication channels with industry partners. This model would extend the reach into higher technology readiness levels beyond which some existing centres typically operate.

3.5 A further alternative is to bring together business, research-intensive universities, and existing centres of excellence to focus on specific challenges. This type of approach has the following advantages over a more ‘fixed’ technology and innovation centre:

· A greater breadth of activity than can be provided within more fixed or limited technology and innovation centres.

· Stronger links to the critical mass of world-leading research expertise that is provided by the UK’s research-intensive universities.

· A greater degree of flexibility, with the ability to rapidly deploy expertise within universities and centres of excellence to address new challenges as they arise. Teams can be dissolved and reformed as needed in the light of changing priorities.

· Greater access to highly skilled graduates and postgraduates, who are looking to join high-tech companies or to start their own.

Successful examples of this type of approach include:

The Global Medical Excellence Cluster (GMEC)

3.5.1 GMEC was formed in 2007, and brings together leading universities, companies and NHS Trusts to build the capabilities to keep the UK globally competitive in biomedical research. Five of the UK’s top life science and medical research-based universities formed GMEC in partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, GE Healthcare, Pfizer UK, the Maudsley Hospital and the Royal Marsden Hospital. All five universities are Russell Group universities: University of Cambridge, Imperial College London, King’s College London, University of Oxford and University College London.

3.5.2 The GMEC cluster model is based on a proven approach. Medical excellence clusters exist in the USA, Europe and Asia. Additional clusters are being built in Asia and the Middle East. GMEC’s vision is to improve patient outcomes and achieve a globally competitive position in biomedical science and innovation. GMEC aims to increase cutting edge medical research, improve collaboration between industrial, academic and clinical partners, and attract increased inward investment.

The Institute for Sustainability

3.5.3 The Institute for Sustainability was set up to accelerate the delivery of sustainable cities and communities, led by a board representing UK industry, academia and public sector. The Institute brings together expertise from nine higher education institutions, including four Russell Group institutions: Imperial College London, King’s College London, University College London, and the University of Southampton. The Institute works closely with private sector and public sector partners to provide the knowledge, experience and practical solutions needed to deliver economically, environmentally and socially sustainable cities and communities.

3.5.4 Private sector partners include: Arup, Biffa, BT, EDF, HSBC, Jones Lang LaSalle, Land Securities, Marks and Spencer, National Physical Laboratory, Pera, Pilkington, ProLogis, QinetiQ, Thames Water, TWI, VTT Group .

3.5.5 Public sector partners include: Communities and Local Government, Dartford Borough Council, East of England Development Agency, Environment Agency, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, London Development Agency, London Thames Gateway Development Corporation, South East England Development Agency.

The Science City Research Alliance

3.5.6 The Science City Research Alliance is a collaboration between the Universities of Birmingham and Warwick, established to increase collaborative industry R&D through demonstrator projects. The Alliance focuses on three areas of complementary research strengths of regional and national relevance, which are: advanced materials, energy futures, and translational medicine.

3.5.7 The Alliance works with both the private sector (including Arup, Aston Martin, Bruker, EON, GKN, JLR, Johnson Matthey, NPL, Sandvik) and the public sector (including local authorities, NHS Trusts, and housing associations).

4. Whose role should it be to coordinate research in a UK-wide network of innovation centres?

4.1 There are a number of roles relating to coordination that need to be considered:

· Coordination of the entire network of innovation centres

· Coordination of research within a specific innovation centre

4.2 In coordinating the entire network of TICs, it is imperative that national research strengths, international developments and engagement, and business needs are all taken into account. An overview of strategic priorities, both immediate and over a longer time horizon, is also needed. The branding of TICs will be crucial, in order to raise their international profile and provide global competitive advantage.

4.3 The Government has announced that the Technology Strategy Board (TSB) will establish and oversee the network of innovation centres. The Russell Group would welcome further opportunities to build and strengthen the links between our institutions and the TSB. Russell Group institutions, with their extensive experience in working with business can offer valuable insights on the latest developments in cutting-edge research, the types of research and information most requested by business, and how research has directly enhanced the growth performance of business.

4.4 The Government has also announced that individual innovation centres will have a high degree of autonomy so they can respond to business needs. The ability to respond flexibly, and rapidly, will be significant to a TIC’s success. However, TICs will also need to respond to emerging developments in research. Therefore, we recommend that the coordination of research within a specific centre needs to be strongly linked to research within existing centres and research-intensive universities, as well as business needs. This will avoid duplication of effort.

4.5 In practice, this may mean that the coordination of research in a TIC needs timely inputs from business and academia. One way of implementing this may be a board coordinating research within a centre, including members from leading businesses and academics. Input from RCUK may also be very helpful.

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 As noted under question 2, there are a number of existing centres that are working on aspects relating to regenerative medicine, plastic electronics and high value manufacturing. These centres are partially funded or sponsored by Government. It will be imperative for the TICs to work together with public sector research establishments and relevant existing centres, forming partnerships where appropriate, to ensure synergies are generated and duplication of effort is minimised in the generation of research.

5.2 In addition, Public Sector Research Establishments and other existing research centres (for example, Diamond and MRC Harwell) have established relationships with business and the community, and considerable commercialisation activities. All TICs will need to ensure that their activities add to, and do not displace, existing valuable activities.

The Russell Group

02 December 2010

Annex (to question 2): Examples of existing centres

Centre for Plastic Electronics, Imperial College London and the Cambridge Integrated Knowledge Centre, University of Cambridge

2.2.1 As two of the leading academic centres in plastic electronics, Imperial and Cambridge are strongly engaged in the process of refining and delivering the national strategy in this area and to this end participate strongly in the printable electronics centres of excellence (PECOE) network and plastic electronics leadership (PELG) group. Both universities have a large number of researchers active in plastic electronics, in Physics, Chemistry, Materials and Engineering - totalling more than 150 in Cambridge and 175 at Imperial. In both universities important links also exist to other university activities in potential end-user areas: Biotechnology, Computer Science, Medicine, Architecture, Environment and Civil Engineering. Both universities work with a broad range of industrial partners including Dow Corning, Plastic Logic, Merck, DuPont Teijin Films, Hitachi, Unilever, Nissan, BT, BASF, BP Solar, General Electric, Konarka, Philips, Solvay, Sumitomo and others.

Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh

2.2.2 The MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine (MRC-CRM) at the University of Edinburgh brings together world leading basic stem cell research with established clinical excellence to deliver a "bench-to-bedside" approach aimed at developing new treatments for  major diseases including cancer,  heart disease, diabetes, degenerative diseases such as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease, and liver failure.

2.2.3 The MRC-CRM is committed to building both strong industrial collaborative links, specifically companies who are seeking to develop technologies in any area of stem cell biology and therapy, interested in derivation and GMP production of new stem cell lines or interested in the development and use of stem cells for drug screening.

Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, University of Sheffield

2.2.4 The University of Sheffield Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (AMRC) with Boeing is a world-leading research centre dedicated to developing innovative technology solutions for advanced materials forming.

2.2.5 The AMRC works in collaboration with a wide range of manufacturing businesses, to develop cutting-edge technologies and provide practical solutions to manufacturing problems.

The Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, University of Manchester and University of Sheffield

2.2.6 The Nuclear AMRC is a joint initiative with industry, the University of Sheffield and the University of Manchester’s Dalton Nuclear Institute.

2.2.7 Working in partnership with Government and business, the Nuclear AMRC is designed to be the focal point for the civil nuclear manufacturing industry in the UK. Assistance will be provided to companies to introduce ‘step change’ manufacturing technologies and to become competitive in global markets, and assist with training and developing staff expertise.

National Composites Centre, Bristol

2.2.8 The National Composites Centre (NCC), was announced in November 2009 as an element of the implementation of the UK Composites Strategy, prepared by BIS with industry and academic stakeholders.

2.2.9 The NCC (http://www.nationalcompositescentre.co.uk/) is an independent, open-access national centre designed to deliver innovation in the design and rapid manufacture of composites and facilitate their widespread industrial exploitation. It is based in Bristol close to research centres of excellence and significant absorptive industrial capacity. The NCC is subject to a strong governance structure, steered by an industry-led Board, and managed by an industry-experienced management group, whilst maintaining close links with academia and government agencies. It brings together industry and academia to develop new technologies for the design and rapid manufacture of high-quality composite products for deployment in multiple industry sectors. The combination of academic and business strengths will speed progress from laboratory to design to factory and into products. Public sector capital investment totalling £25M coupled with major recurrent commitments from industrial partners (Airbus, AgustaWestland, GKN, Rolls Royce, Vestas) has been secured to allow operation of the NCC by summer 2011.

2.2.10 As envisaged in the UK Composites Strategy NCC will link regional centres of excellence around the UK, in HEIs and industry, including the University of Bristol’s Advanced Composites Centre for Innovation and Science, to provide national capability in composites research and development.

WMG, University of Warwick

2.2.11 WMG works with companies to develop better working methods, to match the technologies they employ into what their business wants to achieve. WMG works across a broad range of industrial sectors, including aerospace, pharmaceuticals, automotive manufacture, food processing, banking and healthcare.

2.2.12 Some of the companies WMG have collaborated with include Jaguar Land Rover, TATA, Siemens, AirBus, RBS, GlaxoSmithKline, Northern Foods, Network Rail, BAE Systems and the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority.

GSK Clinical Imaging Centre, Imperial College London

2.2.13 The GSK-sponsored clinical imaging centre at Imperial College London is a multi-million pound collaboration which has created a world-leading facility drawing on the research expertise of Imperial College London.

2.2.14 GlaxoSmithKline committed to a £50m investment in the centre, which officially opened in 2007. Alongside parallel investment from Imperial College London and the Medical Research Council, GSK’s commitment has equipped the centre with state of the art scanning and imaging facilities, which will enable scientists to improve their understanding of some of the world’s most serious diseases, including cancer, cardiovascular disease and neurological disorders. Through improving fundamental understanding of diseases, it will create a platform for the development of new, more effective, treatment and prevention.

Centre for Materials Discovery, University of Liverpool

2.2.15 The Centre for Materials Discovery (CMD), based at the University of Liverpool, provides a research centre and a research and knowledge transfer service to academia and industry in the area of high throughput materials discovery.

2.2.16 Building on the strong base of academic expertise within Liverpool, and working closely with other universities in the North-West, the centre aims to support businesses by providing access to leading research, training for industry personnel, and world-class facilities such as robotics and advanced ICT.

2.2.17 The Centre is explicitly targeted at the use of research excellence to support business endeavor, particularly businesses based within the Northwest. Figures provided by the university indicate that, after three years, the centre has had a major impact within the Merseyside region, including £5.85m Net Value Added to the Merseyside region.

Biopharmaceutical processing, Newcastle University  

2.2.18 The Newcastle University Research Centre in Biopharmaceutical Processing is a UK leader in developing techniques for drug development and production processes.

2.2.19 The centre facilitates interdisciplinary research collaborations between biological, physical and engineering scientists, and developing research expertise which is relevant to the problems and needs of industry.

2.2.20 The work of the research centre in collaboration with industry spans a broad range of knowledge transfer activities. Experts at the centre offer consultancy services and continuing professional development (CPD) courses to the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, such as the application of Process Analytical Technologies (PAT) for the pharmaceutical sector.

Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton

2.2.21 The Institute of Sound and Vibration Research (ISVR) at the University of Southampton carries out world-leading academic research and commercial consultancy and contract research across a range of subjects including acoustics, noise, vibration, human hearing and vehicle dynamics.

2.2.22 Similar to a typical Fraunhofer institute, the ISVR receives around a third of its funding from contract research and consultancy, with another third from academic research grant funding. The final third is primarily research and teaching block grant funding. As well as delivering the contracted research, m uch emphasis is placed on cooperation and collaboration with the bodies who provide funding, including industry, Government Departments and health authorities, in order that academic research and teaching may be directly related to their needs and the everyday needs of society.

High Performance Computing Wales, Cardiff University

2.2.23 High Performance Computing Wales is a £40M pan-Wales university project designed to give businesses working independently or in collaboration with academics access to advanced research computing capability.

2.2.24 Operating via an independent not-for-profit company structure, Cardiff University's Advanced Research Computing at Cardiff (ARCCA) will provide the gateway for researchers at the University to access HPC Wales, facilitating links to Swansea, Aberystwyth, Bangor and Glamorgan Universities, University of Wales Alliance Universities and Technium business innovation centres around Wales. The cutting-edge computing facilities will be available for use by businesses working independently or in collaboration with academics and will establish Wales as a key international centre for specialist computational research.

Institute of Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (ECIT) at Queen’s University Belfast

2.2.25 The Institute of Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (ECIT) at Queen’s University Belfast is a unique £60m facility which opened in 2004. ECIT brings together over 150 staff and focuses upon digital wireless communications technology and secure information technology. Researchers and industrial partners within the institute contribute to ‘mission-led’ research programmes which bring together a range of complementary and multi-disciplinary skills, including data encryption, network security systems, wireless enabled security systems and intelligent video analysis. ECIT has a strong entrepreneurial culture with involvement in 22 early stage companies and six established spin-out firms.

Manufacturing Technology Centre, University of Birmingham, University of Nottingham and Loughborough University

2.2.26 The Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC) represents a new model of collaborative partnership between industry, universities, and research and technology organisations. The MTC reflects the need for manufacturers to move away from competing simply on cost and to compete more on knowledge.

2.2.27 Founder industrial members of the MTC are Rolls-Royce, Jaguar Land Rover, Aero Engine Controls and Airbus UK. Research partners include the University of Birmingham, University of Nottingham, Loughborough University and TWI Ltd, the operating division of The Welding Institute.

2.2.28 The centre is industry - focused, operating in technology readiness levels 4-6, and will provide resources and a high quality environment for the development and demonstration of new technologies. The MTC exemplifies a cross-sectoral approach, developing solutions to high-value manufacturing problems that are applicable to aerospace, automotive, rail and energy sectors. The MTC forms part of a wider, fully complementary network of Advanced Manufacturing Research Centres.

KNT, University of Glasgow

2.2.29 KNT (Kelvin Nanotechnology Ltd) provides nanofabrication research, prototyping, process development and small-scale manufacturing services to industry. Founded in 1998, KNT builds on 30 years of nanotechnology research at the University of Glasgow.

2.2.30 KNT has a global market, working with companies in the UK, USA, Europe and Japan. It specialises in high resolution, large area, multilevel electron beam lithography for applications such as transistor gate writing, imprint masks, opti cal elements, photonic crystals and nanotextured surfaces With support from the TSB’s MNT programme, KNT has built capability in nano imprint lithography, working with end-users and equipment manufacturers to supply imprint mask plates for a wide variety of applications. Spinout and start-up companies are able to access a multi-million pound equipment base and the expertise of dedicated support staff at relatively low cost whilst building product credibility and a customer base. A combination of service provision, collaborative applied R&D and product supply has led to a sustainable business model.