Whither blue skies research in UK universities?

The triennial review of the UK research councils has resulted in an excellent and challenging response, submitted by the Council for the Defence of British Universities (download document here). One important aspect of this document is that it highlights the shift in the tension between funding of near-term and blue skies research, exemplified by the growth of the non-science and non-budget sections of research proposals over the last decade or so. There has been a steady push from government over the past decades for “blue skies research” to “pay its way” and for the marketing of the innovation resulting from research. Research councils have responded by shifting resource to near-term research. An interesting counterpoint is from government itself, in the form of a nice quote from David Willetts on page 4 of the document “Governments picking winners can easily become losers picking government programmes”.

I would add a few points. There are countless examples to underscore the wisdom of Willetts’ point, where predictions of future technology by the eminent have been hopelessly wide of the mark. One I like is from a site of aviation quotes. In 1940 the Committee on Gas Turbines appointed by The National Academy of Sciences, reckoned the jet engine was impossible, yet a year later it was a reality. Famously, Frank Whittle said that “Good thing I was too stupid to know this.” We should also remember an excellent editorial from Nature in 1996 by Eugene Wong, “An economic case for basic research”. The essence is that the return on every unit invested in applied research is low, compared to the return on each unit invested in blue skies research. The core of this argument is the incremental research is just that. Blue skies research is disruptive and so creates new products and markets.
I have a poor personal experience with public sector attempts at technology transfer. The conclusion I draw from this is that any attempt at stimulating economic growth through innovation by people whose living does not depend on a successful outcome of the enterprise is doomed to failure. By all means provide additional incentives (tax breaks etc.) for technology transfer and open up financial lifelines for start ups and SMEs. However, continuing to strangle the pipeline of innovation or the strength of the brand of the research-led UK HEIs can only lead to decline.

Advertisement