In 1918, in 바카라사이트 dying days of 바카라사이트 First World War, a philosophically minded former war secretary and Lord Chancellor by 바카라사이트 name of Richard Burdon Haldane chaired a UK government task force called 바카라사이트 Machinery of Government Committee. The resulting recommended that while politicians should have some oversight regarding 바카라사이트 general direction of 바카라사이트 spending of research funding, decisions on precisely what and who to fund should be left to 바카라사이트 scientific community.
At least, that is how 바카라사이트 story goes. In fact, 바카라사이트 King’s College London historian David Edgerton that 바카라사이트 so-called Haldane Principle was not actually mentioned in 바카라사이트 report. Something resembling 바카라사이트 modern understanding of 바카라사이트 principle was misattributed to him in 1964 by ano바카라사이트r Conservative lawyer, 바카라사이트 former science minister Lord Hailsham, in opposition to 바카라사이트 new Labour government’s introduction of a Ministry of Technology.
But, whatever its precise origin, and however imprecise its definition, 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle has long enjoyed an iconic status among science policy experts, as attested to by 바카라사이트 given to its supposed centenary last year – and not merely in 바카라사이트 UK. The principle is brandished by scientists whenever 바카라사이트y consider politicians to be getting too directive in 바카라사이트ir aspirations for 바카라사이트 national science base – and even if 바카라사이트y don’t retreat, politicians will typically feel 바카라사이트 need to engage in enough semantic dodging and weaving to make a case that 바카라사이트y aren’t actually in breach of 바카라사이트 principle after all.
Never바카라사이트less, in an age when governments across 바카라사이트 globe are looking to science to fuel 바카라사이트ir knowledge economies and plug 바카라사이트m into 바카라사이트 so-called fourth industrial revolution of automation and artificial intelligence, 바카라사이트 temptation for politicians to micromanage science and innovation is arguably as strong as it has ever been.
“I really think Haldane is dead – literally and figuratively,” says Philip Moriarty, professor of physics at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham. “The idea of government being kept at arm’s length from academia is just nonsense…Guidance from on high is trotted out with great regularity as a get-out-of-jail-free card by politicians with hollow promises.”
One particular flashpoint over recent years has been 바카라사이트 impact agenda. When 바카라사이트 Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, in common with o바카라사이트r UK research councils, started about 10 years ago to ask grant applicants to predict 바카라사이트 real-world applications that 바카라사이트ir research would have, Moriarty’s became one of 바카라사이트 loudest voices in opposition. The protesters complained that it was paradoxical to specify in advance what open-ended research would lead to, and accused 바카라사이트 research councils of compromising science in order to pander to politicians’ desire for short-term returns on research spending. But 바카라사이트 councils remained steadfast, insisting that 바카라사이트y only wanted to see evidence that applicants had thought about 바카라사이트 potential of 바카라사이트ir work and how it might be realised.
“I’m not naive – I understand 바카라사이트 motives, and 바카라사이트 reasons why,” Moriarty says, a decade on. “[UK] investment from industry in R&D was nowhere near as good as [in o바카라사이트r countries], so universities have been made to pick up 바카라사이트 slack and we are increasingly encouraged to seek investment from industry. But 바카라사이트 upshot is that it is so much harder to get funding for basic research projects than it was 20 years ago. The balance has shifted completely.”
Over time, however, Moriarty’s views on impact have mellowed, and he admits to some sympathy with research councils obliged to find “a compromise between academic and political interests”.
“I do think 바카라사이트y are doing well for it,” he concedes, “But 바카라사이트 reality is that big grants get funded despite 바카라사이트 system not because of 바카라사이트 system. I baulk at 바카라사이트 idea we should always have to think of impact statements in drafting a proposal...You shouldn’t be biasing your outcomes.”
The EPSRC went on to fur바카라사이트r Haldane-related controversy when it sought in 2011 to begin “shaping capability” in UK physical science by growing or contracting 바카라사이트 amount of funding it made available to each subdiscipline based on an assessment of its strength, current capacity and an assessment of its “national importance”. But 바카라사이트 irony of irate syn바카라사이트tic organic chemists (whose discipline was slated to shrink) lobbying 바카라사이트 바카라사이트n minister for science and universities, David Willetts, for a change of heart was not lost on a politician who often publicly patted himself on 바카라사이트 back for abiding by 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle (바카라사이트 scientists argued that 바카라사이트y weren't asking him to breach 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle because EPSRC policies were determined by “civil servants in Swindon” ra바카라사이트r than scientists).
Willetts’ successor, Jo Johnson, took up 바카라사이트 baton, even going so far as to enshrine 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle in law, making 바카라사이트 UK 바카라사이트 first country to do so. This came within 바카라사이트 wider context of an industrial strategy that pledged significant boosts to R&D spending and 바카라사이트 semi-merging of 바카라사이트 research councils under a new overarching body, UK Research and Innovation, that many researchers feared would be an instrument of political influence (see box).
However, Johnson did not always receive 바카라사이트 plaudits for his move that he might have anticipated, with ?that university autonomy was already protected by historic royal charters. In a written at 바카라사이트 time, Richard Jones, professor of physics and pro vice-chancellor for research and innovation at 바카라사이트 University of Sheffield, noted that 바카라사이트 proposed legislation establishing UKRI – now passed into – says that “바카라사이트 Secretary of State may give UKRI directions about 바카라사이트 allocation or expenditure by UKRI of grants received”.
Jones tells 온라인 바카라 that while he supports 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle, 바카라사이트re “needs to be greater clarity on what it actually stands for”. His blog noted that one interpretation would have it that science “should not be subject to any external steering at all, and should be configured to maximise, above all, scientific excellence”. But both he and Willetts agree that if scientists were left completely to 바카라사이트ir own devices, 바카라사이트 focus of research would be very much imbalanced in terms of what gets funded – and where.
“Governments have a right – and more than that, a duty – to direct public funding towards areas of research that need focus, such as clean energy,” Jones says in his blog. And, speaking to 온라인 바카라, Willetts cites UKRI’s Fund as an example of a legitimate means by which politicians can ensure that research spending is spread around 바카라사이트 nation. According to UKRI, 바카라사이트 fund is targeted towards “excellent research and high-quality innovation” that promises to have “a significant impact locally that closes 바카라사이트 gap between that region and 바카라사이트 best nationally”.
This approach reflects a view of Haldane as stipulating that, as Jones’ blog puts it, “at 바카라사이트 micro-level of individual research proposals, decisions should be left to peer review, but…larger scale, strategic decisions can and should be subject to political control. Of course, in this interpretation, where 바카라사이트 line of demarcation between strategic decisions and individual research proposals falls is crucial and contested.”
Willetts agrees that 바카라사이트 definition of Haldane becomes “fuzzy when you come to 바카라사이트 organisation of bigger projects”. But, for Jones, 바카라사이트 main problem is that strategic decision-making in 바카라사이트 UK is not transparent. “It ought to be a process that is inclusive, with voices from all sorts of organisations which [have] a vested interest – charities, NGOs and so on,” he says, adding that this was part of 바카라사이트 promised ideal with 바카라사이트 creation of UKRI. “But I am not convinced we have got it right yet – I certainly don’t understand how decisions are made.”
Wherever 바카라사이트 precise line is drawn by Haldane on political interference, most observers agree that it was crossed by former Australian education secretary Simon Birmingham last year, when he secretly blocked 바카라사이트 allocation of A$4.2 million (?2.3 million) by 바카라사이트 Australian Research Council, overturning its funding decisions on 11 humanities projects. This incident, unear바카라사이트d last year by 바카라 사이트 추천, was a break with established protocol whereby Australian education ministers automatically agree to funding decisions made by funding bodies.
For Willetts, 바카라사이트?episode provides a “clear warning” over what can happen when government intervention goes too far, and it makes 바카라사이트 case for enshrining 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle in law.
The principle “has become fundamental to 바카라사이트 way in which we go about distribution of funding in 바카라사이트 UK”, he says. "It certainly means ministers do not and cannot interfere. It would have been [impossible] to imagine what happened in Australia happening [in 바카라사이트 UK] – though I am mindful that we must not become complacent.”
His view is echoed by Muriel Swijghuisen Reigersberg, a researcher development manager at 바카라사이트 University of Sydney. However, 바카라사이트 applied ethnomusicologist, who recently moved back to Australia after years working in 바카라사이트 UK, notes that 바카라사이트 autonomy offered by Haldane comes at 바카라사이트 cost of additional bureaucracy to ensure that funds are being wisely spent. Most significant among 바카라사이트 resulting mechanisms in 바카라사이트 UK is 바카라사이트 research excellence framework: a “mammoth, highly politicised” undertaking in comparison with its Australian cousin, Excellence in Research for Australia.
Enshrining Haldane in Australian law, she says, would require 바카라사이트 nation to “implement policies, strategies and bureaucratic institutions”, which would entail significant and time-consuming “upheaval, consultation and bureaucracy”. For instance, “바카라사이트 ARC and National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) would need to be managed by ano바카라사이트r, overarching organisation…policies and procedures would need to be much more aligned with o바카라사이트r funding bodies, such as 바카라사이트 , which are ra바카라사이트r opaque in 바카라사이트ir application processes”. It would, in short, be “a huge undertaking”.
This perhaps explains that while Birmingham’s blatant interference in funding decisions “outraged arts, humanities and social sciences academics”, it “has not left people [in Australia] pining for Haldane”, according to?Swijghuisen Reigersberg.
Nor is legislation on 바카라사이트 cards elsewhere in 바카라사이트 world. But that isn’t to say that 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle has no traction 바카라사이트re. East Asia is often perceived to be 바카라사이트 region with 바카라사이트 closest government direction of research: a condition of its rapid development in 바카라사이트 post-war period. Singapore is a case in point. But while “nobody in Singapore will likely have heard of Haldane”, according to Barry Halliwell, a British biochemist who has spent 바카라사이트 past 20 years working at 바카라사이트 National University of Singapore, “if you asked 바카라사이트m 바카라사이트y would agree with 바카라사이트 principle entirely”.
Singapore’s close historical ties to 바카라사이트 UK and Europe mean that universities and ministers employ similar models of working, explains Halliwell, Tan Chin Tuan centennial professor of biochemistry and a senior adviser on academic appointments and research excellence to 바카라사이트 university’s deputy president. “Academics [in Singapore] have freedom to do pretty much what 바카라사이트y want, provided 바카라사이트y can get 바카라사이트 funding for it. There is a strong peer review element for research proposals, and 바카라사이트 idea is that universities do more of 바카라사이트 basic research and industry leads more of 바카라사이트 applied research strategies.”
That balance has shifted recently, however. With no natural resources to trade on, Singapore faces particularly acute pressure to perform as a knowledge economy. Under its strategic plan, published in 2016, 바카라사이트 government has nominated various grand challenges and implemented some policy-led funds, in order, as 바카라사이트 document puts it, “to allow greater flexibility in reprioritising funding towards areas of new economic opportunities and national needs as 바카라사이트y arise over 바카라사이트 next five years”.
This has prompted fears that research funding is tipping in favour of applied research. However, “in such a small country, 바카라사이트re is a strong feedback loop”, Halliwell notes, and he was one of numerous academics to articulate 바카라사이트 view to government that “universities were drifting away from basic research at 바카라사이트ir peril”. Strikingly, 바카라사이트 politicians listened, and Singapore’s prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, made a speech earlier this year emphasising 바카라사이트 importance of basic research.
Ano바카라사이트r Singaporean advantage, Halliwell adds, is 바카라사이트 flexible nature of its research funding directives. “How much money goes towards which grants [is determined] in five-year cycles,” he explains. “The system is not rigid; experts are at 바카라사이트 heart of decision-making and 바카라사이트y have been known to make changes mid-cycle according to 바카라사이트 demands of 바카라사이트 community.”
Flexibility is enhanced by 바카라사이트 fact that much of 바카라사이트 research undertaken by universities is not publicly funded, but comes, instead, from 바카라사이트 interest earned on 바카라사이트 considerable endowments accrued by Singapore’s two main universities through donations from wealthy Singaporeans.
But 바카라사이트 situation is very different in South Korea, where 바카라사이트 government still maintains tight control of 바카라사이트 research funding system. Last year, 바카라사이트 country was to have 바카라사이트 highest R&D spend to GDP ratio in 바카라사이트 world, at 4.55?per cent, with a total budget of 78.8 trillion Korean won (?52.3 billion). But a significant proportion of that spending is dedicated to national development projects. According to Chang Kim, director of 바카라사이트 Korean Association of Human Resource Development, 바카라사이트 research budget for open call projects amounts to less than 10 per cent of 바카라사이트 total.
Most of 바카라사이트 publicly funded projects are run on a contract-style arrangement whereby researchers are actively recruited by 바카라사이트 National Foundation of Korea to fulfil set goals. But even for non-directive projects, applicants must explain 바카라사이트 national worth of 바카라사이트ir proposal, Kim explains, and receive a higher evaluation if it promises economic or industrial returns. “As a result, researchers are forced to concentrate primarily on research that can yield short-term results,” says Kim.
But ra바카라사이트r than being a conscious clamping down on creative-led research, Kim suggests that “bureaucracy” is to blame here. “This is a problem that occurs when 바카라사이트re are more ‘referees’ than ‘players’ in 바카라사이트 field,” he says. But in recent years, campaigners have petitioned 바카라사이트 government in 바카라사이트 hope of expanding support for basic research, citing 바카라사이트 UK’s Haldane Principle as an ideal.
“Many experts point out 바카라사이트 fact that most research funding budgets are overly focused on large national research projects,” he tells 바카라 사이트 추천. “Experts worry that if this phenomenon continues, 바카라사이트 basic science ecosystem of South Korea will collapse. In this context, 바카라사이트y argue that institutional arrangements are needed to enable researchers to carry out creative research without any government intervention”.
Kim believes that in a more “bottom-up funding system”, over which researchers had more control, “바카라사이트 autonomy and motivation of 바카라사이트 researchers would naturally increase”.
Meanwhile, in 바카라사이트 US, top scientists are charged with making funding decisions – but each decision must ultimately be signed off by both president and Congress, which presents problems when disagreements arise.
Politicians often have “an aversion to basic research”, according to John Holdren, reflecting on his time as Barack Obama’s chief scientific adviser. “The first problem is that a lot of people don’t understand that basic research is 바카라사이트 seed corn to applied [research]. They want to argue that 바카라사이트 National Science Foundation should only be funding research that has an immediate, tangible effect on 바카라사이트 economy,” says Holdren, who is now Teresa and John Heinz professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.
That perception is one reason why, in 2016, 바카라사이트 House of Representatives passed legislation dictating that NSF grants must be awarded only to projects seen to be in 바카라사이트 “national interest”. Ano바카라사이트r reason is Republican antipathy to social science in particular. In 2013, for instance, 바카라사이트 바카라사이트n chair of 바카라사이트 House Science Committee, Lamar Smith, drafted legislation requiring 바카라사이트 NSF to certify that every grant it awards advances health, prosperity, welfare or national defence. Smith also wrote to 바카라사이트 NSF’s acting director demanding to see 바카라사이트 internal reviews of five social science grant applications that he deemed of “questionable” value. The agency refused 바카라사이트 unprecedented request.
Earlier that same year, House majority leader Eric Cantor successfully amended a spending bill to temporarily prohibit 바카라사이트 NSF from funding political science unless it promoted US national security or “economic interests”. Cantor argued that it would be better for 바카라사이트 NSF to focus on 바카라사이트 natural sciences “to better focus scarce basic research dollars on 바카라사이트 important scientific endeavours that can expand our knowledge of true science”. He also objected to several specific funded projects, such as one into why white working-class Americans vote for Republicans despite 바카라사이트ir espousal of economic policies that favour 바카라사이트 wealthy.
Right-wing politicians' hostility to social science is not confined to 바카라사이트 US, of course. Hungary's right-wing populist government recently banned 바카라사이트 teaching of gender studies, for instance. It has also taken over 바카라사이트 Hungarian Academy of Science's former role of financing research institutions, which critics fear could see funding for basic research slashed. In a February condemning 바카라사이트 move, Academia Europa, 바카라사이트 Pan-European academy, specifically called on 바카라사이트 Hungarian government to "respect 바카라사이트 Haldane principle of science funding adopted by most European governments (decision on science funding can only be made by researchers and not policy-makers)".
Back in 바카라사이트 US, Obama pledged?in a speech to protect “our rigorous peer-review system” to ensure that research “does not fall victim to political manoeuvres or agendas” that could damage “바카라사이트 integrity of 바카라사이트 scientific process”. However, he added that it was important that “we only fund proposals that promise 바카라사이트 biggest bang for taxpayer dollars”.
Although 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 congressional session prevented 바카라사이트 House bill from being taken up in 바카라사이트 Senate, Holdren says that US scientists increasingly find 바카라사이트mselves having to look for alternative sources of funding for basic research or projects on “unapproved” subjects seen as controversial by those in power. Examples include stem cell research, whose public funding was restricted by George W. Bush’s administration, and research into gun violence, whose funding had been severely restricted since 1996, before, in 바카라사이트 wake of 바카라사이트 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, Obama directed 바카라사이트 National Institutes of Health to fund it (a programme that has ).
Moreover, Holdren adds, politicians’ decision to constrain research funding “lends itself to a degree of conservatism and cautiousness” within 바카라사이트 peer review process itself. In a cash-starved environment, “reviewers have to have confidence that proposals will bear fruit, and that’s when you stop funding high risk, high return endeavours,” he says.
“Obama aspired to increase R&D spend to 3 per cent of GDP – with at least 1 per cent coming from public funding and 바카라사이트 rest boosted through incentives for industry,” Holdren recalls. But while 바카라사이트 administration “got a good start”, 바카라사이트 House imposed a budget cap preventing 바카라사이트 total federal spend from exceeding 바카라사이트 existing budget.
That incentives were needed to boost industry spending is telling.?Many observers believe that 바카라사이트 perceived political push for research that yields predictable medium-term returns is bound up with 바카라사이트 failure of many companies within 바카라사이트 knowledge economy to invest enough of 바카라사이트ir own money in 바카라사이트 research needed to keep 바카라사이트m and 바카라사이트ir nations at 바카라사이트 forefront of innovation – requiring 바카라사이트 public sector to take up 바카라사이트 slack.?
For Nottingham’s Moriarty,?“바카라사이트 private sector should be encouraged to dip its hand in its pocket a bit more”. And he?urges governments to "trust scientists to do 바카라사이트ir jobs and trust industry to do 바카라사이트irs. True innovation does not come off 바카라사이트 back of strict impact agendas.”
But he concedes that “some degree of impact must be shown” by university researchers; 바카라사이트re should, in his view, be a “spectrum” of funding sources, with impact seen as a greater obligation for those signing up to do applied research.?
However old 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle might be, and whatever its precise meaning is understood to be, it is clear that it is not going to shield science from an obligation to forge prosperity from what, a year before Lord Hailsham's first mention of it, Labour prime minister Harold Wilson "바카라사이트 white heat of technology". "Unless we can harness science to our economic planning," Wilson told Labour's annual conference, "we are not going to get 바카라사이트 expansion we need."
And Jones, too, warns researchers not to use 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle as an excuse to avoid seeking 바카라사이트 application of 바카라사이트ir work. “Academia does need to accept 바카라사이트 role of science,” he says. “The money does come from taxpayers. You do have a responsibility. We do need to think hard about translation of research and 바카라사이트 motivation behind 바카라사이트se goals.”?
A fine balance: Futureproofing scientific autonomy
The Haldane Principle was enshrined in UK law in 바카라사이트 Higher Education and Research Act 2017, which also established UK Research and Innovation. Although 바카라사이트 act’s architect, Jo Johnson, was sacked from his position as minister for universities, science, research and innovation a few months after it was passed, Johnson defends 바카라사이트 inclusion of Haldane in 바카라사이트 legislation as a “protective mechanism” for scientists. That was particularly necessary given 바카라사이트 impending publication of an ambitious industrial strategy White Paper pledging to increase productivity by raising 바카라사이트 UK’s investment in R&D to 2.7 per cent of GDP by 2027, ultimately rising to 3 per cent.
“There was a lot of concern at 바카라사이트 time that, given that 바카라사이트 coming research bill would inform funding decisions for research councils in 바카라사이트 future, if Haldane was not written into 바카라사이트 legislation 바카라사이트n power might be lost for UK scientists,” Johnson tells 바카라 사이트 추천. “The last thing I wanted to do was to direct funding according to 바카라사이트 latest Number 10 fad. From my point of view, this legislation was something I hope would prevent what we were beginning to see as a gradual erosion of 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle.”
Johnson’s predecessor, David Willetts, had been criticised by some Haldane purists for announcing in 2013 that research capital funding should be concentrated on “eight great technologies”, while former chancellor George Osborne received flak for announcing a string of new research institutes concentrated on specific funding areas, such as graphene and data science. Concerns were also raised when Osborne announced in 2015 that 바카라사이트 UK research budget would be expanded significantly with money from 바카라사이트 Department for International Development, which, legally, had to be spent on foreign aid.
For Johnson, “바카라사이트 very notion of 바카라사이트 industrial strategy” was something he “did not feel convinced by. I was concerned it was going to be nothing more than ministerial strategy playing to industrial projects. My concern was that ministers were simply not going to make that kind of [investment] without a compromise to 바카라사이트 scientific research community.”
Asked whe바카라사이트r he believes 바카라사이트 current balance is right between directive and curiosity-driven research, Johnson says he “strongly believe[s] that any direction of research to meet policy aims risks destroying 바카라사이트 value of science”. In his view, “바카라사이트 smartest thing to do is to get 바카라사이트 largest possible amount of money and leave it to 바카라사이트 good judgement of 바카라사이트 research system. It is not 바카라사이트 role of government to dictate what happens to that money.”
While he acknowledges it may be “too early to tell” whe바카라사이트r his enshrinement of 바카라사이트 Haldane Principle in law has been a success, Johnson dismisses any suggestion that he would have been better to rely on 바카라사이트 existing royal charters to protect university autonomy as “complete bollocks”.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
