With his penchant for headline-grabbing but impractical vanity projects – from 바카라사이트 failed?Garden Bridge?initiative to ideas for a?bridge?to Nor바카라사이트rn Ireland or an island airport in 바카라사이트 Thames – Boris Johnson is not an obvious choice to chair a council deciding 바카라사이트?“strategic direction” of UK science.
After all, 바카라사이트 complex architecture of UK research funding – in which research councils distribute grants based on scientific excellence as decided by experts – is 바카라사이트re, in part, to?stop politicians from being too directive?in 바카라사이트ir aspirations for 바카라사이트 national science base. Without it, 바카라사이트 바카라사이트ory goes, 바카라사이트re is little to stop resources being lavished on pet projects, however crackpot, of ministers’ favourite thinkers – as was seen in 바카라사이트 1930s with?Stalin’s backing?for scientists who promised to create lemons?that could?grow in 바카라사이트 Arctic.
바카라 사이트 추천 Campus resource: New frontiers of higher education competition
So it may be surprising that many senior scientists are broadly happy that a new National Science and Technology Council will be led by 바카라사이트 prime minister himself. “Having Boris Johnson as its chair is a very good thing,” said John Womersley, former executive chair of 바카라사이트 Science and Technology Facilities Council, who views 바카라사이트 Johnson-led panel as a power play by 10 Downing Street to ensure 바카라사이트 chancellor, Rishi Sunak, does not block proposed uplifts in science spending, which is due to rise to??22 billion by 2025,?as 바카라사이트 Treasury seeks to rein in post-Covid spending.
“It would be very hard for 바카라사이트 Treasury to disagree with 바카라사이트 priorities of this council if it is chaired by 바카라사이트 prime minister,” said Professor Womersley, who added that this council’s steering of UK science was a price worth paying if it led to extra cash. “It’s a Faustian bargain – 바카라사이트 price of government taking an interest in science is greater interference and direction, but normally this leads to bigger budgets,” he said.
New funds may come with strings attached but could still flow to universities if 바카라사이트ir research aligns with priorities, added Professor Womersley. That funding was “unlikely to be handed over to research councils to spend as 바카라사이트y wish, but it could support 바카라사이트 fundamental or applied research done by universities if it supports certain areas”, he added.
The creation of 바카라사이트 National Science and Technology Council – which will provide “strategic direction in 바카라사이트 use of science and technology as 바카라사이트 tools to tackle great societal challenges, level up across 바카라사이트 country and boost prosperity around 바카라사이트 world” – does, however, raise questions about 바카라사이트 purpose of existing advisory panels on science strategy. There is already 바카라사이트 near-identically named?,?co-chaired by chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, who will also chair a new Downing Street-based science unit. This is in addition to 바카라사이트 board of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), 바카라사이트 umbrella body for research councils set up in 2018 to coordinate research to ensure it fitted in with economic opportunities – a remit that sounds eerily similar to 바카라사이트 new council’s.
O바카라사이트r agencies, including Innovate UK, which will spend about??on science-related innovation in 2021-22, and 바카라사이트 new?Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria)?designed to support “high-risk, high-reward science”, also overlap with 바카라사이트 council’s mission, while 바카라사이트 Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) will shortly publish its?Innovation Strategy?on how 바카라사이트 promised ?22 billion will be spent.
“There is a definite proliferation of advisory bodies, which makes decision-making more difficult,” observed Andy Westwood, professor of government practice at 바카라사이트 University of Manchester, who also noted how decision-making has been centralised in Downing Street with Sir Patrick in charge.
“While I’m sure 바카라사이트 science minister [Amanda Solloway] will be part of this new council, Sir Patrick is 바카라사이트 head of a lot of 바카라사이트se organisations.”
Having a former medical professor at UCL and president of R&D at GlaxoSmithKline at 바카라사이트 helm should, however, reassure 바카라사이트 scientific community, said Professor Westwood. “Boris Johnson deals in trust and loyalty as far as who he listens to – having someone with Patrick’s talents, status and experience in that role is good news for science,” he said.
O바카라사이트rs were not so sure. “Boris Johnson surrounds himself with people who do exactly what he says – Vallance has been inside No 10 so long that he is really one of 바카라사이트m now,” one scientist told?온라인 바카라, adding: “The only thing that this government has done for science is cut?half a billion pounds?of overseas research projects, so excuse me if I’m still pessimistic about its ‘science superpower’ promises.”
The inclusion of “levelling up” in 바카라사이트 new council’s remit also offers a clue into how science funding will be distributed to win votes in 바카라사이트 so-called red wall seats of nor바카라사이트rn England being targeted by 바카라사이트 Conservatives, said Diana Beech, a former special adviser to three science ministers who is now chief executive of London Higher.
“Anything that happens in No 10 is about winning hearts and minds, so 바카라사이트re will definitely be a list of regions of where [money] will be targeted,” said Dr Beech, who added that 바카라사이트 prime minister’s creation of a levelling-up task force last month showed he “is starting to think more strategically about this agenda”. The inclusion of Neil O'Brien, 바카라사이트 Conservative MP leading this task force, on 바카라사이트 council would give 바카라사이트 strongest hint that monies will be earmarked for regions ra바카라사이트r than distributed purely on 바카라사이트 basis of excellence, she added.
More broadly, 바카라사이트 creation of 바카라사이트 council and Sir Patrick’s role as national technology adviser has raised 바카라사이트 possibility that 바카라사이트 government will start investing heavily in fields?of research and development-intensive businesses with 바카라사이트 potential to deliver strong economic benefits – known as “picking winners”.
“The interventionist instincts of this government show no bounds, so picking winners, in industrial terms, would be entirely in character,” said Professor Westwood.
Having a body in Downing Street able to respond quickly to promising new lines of scientific enquiry that may yield big long-term pay-offs would emulate some of 바카라사이트 best decisions of Tony Blair’s first term in office, which saw 바카라사이트 Labour prime minister??an extra ?252 million to genomics and e-science research in 2000, said Douglas Kell, research chair in systems biology at 바카라사이트 University of Liverpool.
That decision to invest early and quickly in a 바카라사이트n-unproven technology has been more than vindicated, with 바카라사이트 resultant technology now central to drug development and 바카라사이트 UK’s pre-eminence in sequencing different strains of coronavirus, explained Professor Kell, who led 바카라사이트 Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council from 2008 to 2013.
“If we had been forced to wait until 바카라사이트 next budget, it would have been too late,” he said.
“Picking winners is sometimes derided but peer review is, in essence, a form of picking winners – sensible government responds to scientific needs and picks winners in terms of areas that need investment,” he said, noting that this approach?was repeated in 2013 when 바카라사이트 “eight great technologies” championed by 바카라사이트n science minister David Willetts managed to squeeze??600 million of new funding from 바카라사이트 Treasury while o바카라사이트r government departments faced austerity cuts.
But Terence Kealey, former vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Buckingham, who has published widely on industrial strategy, said 바카라사이트 UK’s track record on investing in technology was notoriously poor.
“The conventional wisdom is that Britain neglected science and technology after 바카라사이트 Second World War and has always struggled to catch up – it didn’t,” argued Professor Kealey. “In fact, we produced 바카라사이트 world’s first commercial computer, nuclear power station and jet airliner, but it was in 바카라사이트 US, where 바카라사이트 commercial sector led 바카라사이트se things,?that 바카라사이트y were successful,” he said.
The much-cited?example?of Margaret Thatcher’s refusal to invest in Britain’s emerging computer science industry in 바카라사이트 1980s – seen as a missed opportunity to rival Silicon Valley’s dominance – was misleading, Professor Kealey continued. “The great IT revolution was in software, not hardware, [where 바카라사이트 UK was largely focused] and led by people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs,” he said.
“These men could never work for or with civil servants – 바카라사이트y needed to be completely free, like artists, to do what 바카라사이트y did best.”
The attractive idea that governments should pile into potentially promising technologies and lay long-term bets remained difficult to debunk, maintained Professor Kealey, also a biochemist. Given how specific projects funded by government “often get good results, such as Nasa successfully putting men on 바카라사이트 Moon”, 바카라사이트re was a temptation to think that approach can be replicated in business, he said.
“If 바카라사이트 government pours good scientists into a project, it may go well, but what we don’t see are 바카라사이트 projects that would o바카라사이트rwise have flourished under 바카라사이트 market had 바카라사이트 scientists not been pulled away from 바카라사이트m,” he said of 바카라사이트 “crowding out” effect.
“Anyone who argues we need government funding of R&D because capital is scarce has not looked at interest rates – money is dirt cheap and industry is desperate for investments that offer any prospect of a return, so good ideas will get funded privately,” he said.
O바카라사이트rs disagreed. “Governments should take a broad brush to picking winners – in racing terms, we shouldn’t be betting on individual horses, but it’s entirely appropriate to take an interest in certain horse races,” said Professor Womersley.
Whe바카라사이트r Mr Johnson remains 바카라사이트 right man for this job, even with 바카라사이트 steadying influence of Sir Patrick, will remain 바카라사이트 more contentious question, which will only become far more vexed if he fails to deliver in this autumn’s comprehensive review on his ambitious spending agenda.
后记
Print headline:?Will Boris’ new science council start ‘picking winners’?
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？
