|
As a result of the 2010 Spending Review, science funding over the next four years will be standing still and there will be increased emphasis on research impacts, and national and strategic priorities. There is concern that fundamental and theoretical subjects such as astronomy and particle physics, which do not provide immediate economic returns, may now be vulnerable.
The Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), which funds much research into astronomy and particle physics, received a relatively good settlement. STFC funding for astronomy, however, sees a reduction in both its resource and capital budgets by the end of the four years compared with 2010/11, with an overall fall of 21% in the total astronomy budget by 2014/15. In contrast, particle physics sees a small increase in its total budget of 5% over this period, although increases in its resource budget masks a large fall in the capital budget for particle physics.
When put in a wider context the situation is worrying for both astronomy and particle physics. By 2014/15 spending in both of these areas will be around 50% lower than its 2005 level. The STFC and the astronomers gave us conflicting analyses. The STFC pointed to decisions taken in 2002 when the UK decided to join the European Southern Observatory (ESO). This resulted in additional expenditure over the following years that had to be offset by future spending reductions and withdrawal from northern hemisphere ground-based optical and infrared facilities. Others contended that the STFC's strategy was not so clear cut, and that ESO accession did not justify all future spending reductions and withdrawals. While we accept that there was a stated long-term intention to withdraw from some facilities following ESO accession, we took the view that the decision to join ESO does not provide cover for all future reductions in spending on astronomy. We find it inexplicable that the planned withdrawals at the time of ESO accession were not incorporated into all subsequent PPARC and STFC policy documents. Unfortunately, this failure by STFC to communicate is chronic and typical and is the reason why its client communities have such a low opinion of it.
We are concerned about the impact withdrawal from astronomical facilities will have on UK astronomy. It is essential that the STFC re-examine the case for maintaining UK access to some ground-based optical and infrared telescopes in the northern hemisphere, especially in light of the relatively small amount of money that would allow continuity. In our view it is crucial that, if the UK is to continue to attract, train and retain the very best scientists, and reap the future economic and social rewards, the STFC must ensure it invests in the full range of astronomical facilities. Reductions in funding on astronomy and particle physics over the next four years will determine whether the UK has a significant part to play in these fields for decades to come, and this fact must not be overlooked.
The STFC must also look to continue to improve its communication and engagement with the researchers and scientists that it funds. While it is clear to us that some lessons from earlier failures in communication and engagement have been learned, there is still a large amount of room for improvement and the STFC must commit to working with researchers and academics, and acting as an advocate for all of the science disciplines it covers.
Finally, if the UK's supply of astronomers and particle physicist is to be ensured for future generations to come it is important that every effort is made to inspire young people to study science. We believe the STFC must formally look to encourage researchers and scientists to make outreach and public engagement activities an integral part of their role. Furthermore, the STFC must exploit its network of strategic partners in the public sector, universities, learned societies and industry and act as a conduit in developing, coordinating and promoting a formal programme of outreach between these partner organisations and schools. To achieve this, the STFC and others must first overcome the 'silo mentality' which we found still pervades government and means relatively cost-effective educational research projects, such as the National Schools Observatory, which are so important to inspiring the next generation of scientists, risk being lost.
|
