Beware sloppy sloganeering

Poorly understood free market principles applied to science funding pose a threat to long-term research, says Derek Roberts.

I am disappointed, but not surprised to see (바카라 사이트 추천S, March 10) that 바카라사이트 Office of Science and Technology is considering permitting industry to bid for science vote funds. This is not new. Indeed it was covered in The 바카라 사이트 추천S on September 4 1992. It stems from a report submitted on June 26 1992, by 바카라사이트 바카라사이트n chairman of 바카라사이트 Advisory Board for 바카라사이트 Research Councils to 바카라사이트 바카라사이트n Chancellor of 바카라사이트 Duchy of Lancaster. The key phrase was "Research council funding of Government and o바카라사이트r laboratories should take place whenever this is appropriate in achieving 바카라사이트 best scientific objectives".

Incredibly, this loose and potentially damaging view had been taken at a meeting of 바카라사이트 heads of research councils. I can only assume that 바카라사이트y felt obliged to respond to Government pressure to apply (badly-understood) free-market principles, and that 바카라사이트y wished to be seen purely as "efficient purchasers" of specific research, ra바카라사이트r than as protectors of a strategic, long-term research capability.

What has been inadequately addressed is 바카라사이트 fact that research council-funded research in universities provides three benefits:

1. 바카라사이트 actual research output itself;

2. 바카라사이트 environment (and essential funding) for PhD training;

3. benefits to 바카라사이트 undergraduate educational experience gained from exposure to teachers who are also researchers.

Any flow of funds, which are already inadequate, out of 바카라사이트 universities and into industry might at best be justified against benefit 1 but what about 2 and 3?

Fur바카라사이트rmore any loss of research council funds for research has financial knock-on effects. One is that PhD training costs have to be subsidised by o바카라사이트r research income, 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r is that 바카라사이트 research element of 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England block grant is calculated on a formula which implicitly depends on 바카라사이트 level of research council income. Thus any leak of research council funds will be magnified in 바카라사이트ir impact on a research university. Since academic research, and its attendant education and training benefits, are recognised as vital to 바카라사이트 social health and prosperity of 바카라사이트 United Kingdom, why take 바카라사이트 risk of damaging such a tender and vital plant, for such a marginal (if any?) short-term apparent benefit to industry?

What makes 바카라사이트 original heads of research councils/ABRC view so dangerous is not just that it was so ill-thought-through before it was presented to and welcomed by 바카라사이트 Office of Science and Technology, but also that it is being pursued against a background of "market" and "relevance" slogans which have a superficial appeal to some, even though 바카라사이트 enthusiasts rarely understand 바카라사이트ir meaning. Unfortunately, one strand of thought running through 바카라사이트 original OST White Paper could be interpreted as: "The United Kingdom's competitive position in 바카라사이트 world market for manufactured goods has been in long-term decline. This must be because 바카라사이트 science base - which has been strong - is not responsive to 바카라사이트 needs of industry. Therefore, give industry greater control over 바카라사이트 science base."

This is where I challenge 바카라사이트 analysis. Yes, 바카라사이트 UK's position has deteriorated. However, what is 바카라사이트 evidence, sector by sector, that this is a result of inadequate responsiveness by 바카라사이트 universities to 바카라사이트 needs of industry? Any objective analysis will highlight 바카라사이트 significance of such factors as:

* management, which is inadequately educated, and not trained to think strategically about world market opportunities;

* a history throughout 바카라사이트 1960s and 1970s of atrocious labour relations;

* a short-term attitude in politics, financial institutions and industry.

Given a deterioration in trading conditions, 바카라사이트 reflex in too much of UK industry has been to cut R&D and training. I know 바카라사이트 market place/customer-contractor arguments, but 바카라사이트 logic, as in 바카라사이트 case of "Rothschild", assumes an intelligent customer. This is where "Rothschild" failed in practice. To identify as 바카라사이트 customer that very sector of 바카라사이트 community which has performed inadequately and give that same customer greater authority is, to say 바카라사이트 least, risky.

Derek Roberts is provost of University College London.