UK science investment isn’t really protected

A new analysis by the UK Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) has exposed what it calls “an alarming decline” in the country’s science funding, despite political pledges to protect such investment.

The research by CaSE shows that by 2014-15 the research base will be £1.6 billion worse off in cash terms, as a result of funding decisions taken since the government spending review last year. Inflation will lead to a further erosion of investment available for science and engineering.

Although the government said the science budget would be protected at £4.6 billion a year, this pledge was made possible by redefining what the term science budget means, according to CaSE. For instance, although ‘capital’ funding for research equipment and facilities was slashed by almost half, such spending no longer counts towards the official Science Budget.

CaSE Director Imran Khan said, “Our analysis shows that, once you take a broad view of the research base budget, we’re seeing an alarming decline in funding - and that’s before you even take into account the effects of inflation. We have to see that being reversed, or else feel the costs for decades to come.”

Inflation will substantially erode the value of the science budget in real-terms over the spending review period, according to CaSE. Current estimates put the Consumer Price Index at 4.4 per cent for April 2011, and 2.5 per cent for the second quarter of next year, before approaching the government’s target of 2 per cent. This would yield a real terms reduction in the value of the 2010 cash settlement of 14 per cent by 2015.

However, inflation in science and engineering may be higher still. If costs for research in the UK inflate more rapidly than general costs, the overall impact on the UK’s Science Budget by 2014-2015 could be real terms cuts of up to 20 per cent.

“We need to start looking ahead and asking if this financial settlement is really going to help the UK get to where it needs to be,” Khan said. The UK has to invest in research and development, “or risk becoming irrelevant and uncompetitive.”

Martin Rees, a former President of the UK’s Royal Society said the message coming out of the survey is “disquieting” with the UK's cost-effective science base and university system at risk. “If we don't match the investment of other nations, and are perceived to be in relative decline, we will lose, rather than attract, the mobile talent that is crucial for sustained excellence. And we will send a negative signal to young people who are ambitious to pursue a scientific career. The sum saved by these real-terms reductions is very small compared to the opportunity costs of choking off a long-term recovery.”

At the same time, Cancer  Research UK, the largest charitable funder of R&D in Europe, spending  £332 million on research in 2010/2011,  launched a report calling for the government to set out a clear vision for research and innovation in its new innovation strategy, which is due to be published before the end of the year.  The vision needs to demonstrate how the UK will provide a stable environment for medical research to enable life sciences to be a key driver of economic growth, the charity says.

The report, Building the Ideal Environment for Medical Research, outlines the elements that should form the core of a strategy to deliver on the government’s commitment to support medical research.

Harpal Kumar, CEO of Cancer Research UK, said, “Although Cancer Research UK does not directly receive any government funding for its research, government support for medical research more generally is a critical driver of the health and wealth of the nation.” The innovation strategy needs to recognise the value of the range of medical research funders in the UK, charitable, public and private and encourage innovation through supportive infrastructure, a proportionate regulatory regime, and ensuring we continue to attract the very best people into medical research.