|
Defra Workshop
Comments by Paul Biscoe on the Defra Workshop on Agriculture Research Funding 30th July 2008 at Defra Innovation Centre
Update
I have waited before sending out my comments on this Workshop until I had the Defra Report, which is attached below.
Background
I had been invited to attend this Workshop on behalf of AFCP. Prior to the Workshop I had circulated a copy of the letter of invitation to all charities on the AFCP mailing list asking for comment/suggest on which issues were of concern. . I had responses from 16 charities and would like to thank all those who contributed. Prior to the Workshop I arranged the comments and suggestions into groups (see below) and presented these as appropriate at the Workshop.
Format of Workshop
The Workshop was facilitated by the head of the Innovation Centre and placed considerable emphasis on interactive discussion in small groups. Seating was at tables of 6 and the group changed halfway through the Workshop. In addition there were a series of short presentations of about 10 mins., at intervals throughout, to inform the audience on activities that might be relevant to the discussions. Presentations were given by
Professor Robert Watson, Defra Chief Scientist
Dr Colin Denis, Sustainable Farming & Food Research Priorities Group
Sir Don Curry
Dr Sue Popple, Head of Sustainable Farming and Food Science Div., Defra
Professor David Leaver, Commercial Farmers Group
Katrina Williams, Director General for Food & Farming, Defra
Brain Harris, BBSRC
Kevin Roberts, acting CEO Agriculture & Horticulture Development Board
The Workshop groups were asked to raise issues of concern to each person and then to discuss these to obtain an understanding of the issue and agreement of its importance. These concerns were grouped by the Centre staff and were subsequently worked on by the Groups. This process eventually led to about 8 key issues being worked on by self forming groups.
Reflections & Outcomes
The use of a professional facilitator worked very well as did working in small groups. This enabled issues to be fully discussed and different viewpoints to be considered but as always time was limited.
Most of the issues that I had received were raised with specific emphasis on
disconnect in the research pipeline basic to applied
the responsibility and funding for applied research
translation & delivery of results into practice
the contraction of the science base & scientific facilities?
failure to attract young people into science
development of an integrated research policy
balancing productivity/competitiveness and environmental benefits
strong linkages between potential funders of research
Please see Defra's Report, attached below, for how these issues will be dealt with.
Summary of Suggestions from Charities in response to Defra Workshop on Agriculture Research Funding
Applied Research
This is almost non-existent.
Agriculture not seem to be recognised by research councils
The research councils pay only lip service and can "run a mile" at the mention of applied research.
There is no link between basic and applied
Loss of LINK with no assessment of benefits, industry funding contributions, value etc is very poorly regarded
As funding has dried up teams are being lost and very difficult to "turn them on & off"
Knowledge transfer
Understandably very little as no applied research so no results to communicate
No structure/system for effective communication to the applied/practical level
Great need for good KT to offset pressures from commercial companies
Training & Education
MAFF studentships gone, great loss and nothing to replace it
Few studentship opportunities and loss of talent to the industry
Strategies & Priorities
Unclear about consultation process to determine strategy & priority, who consulted, how?
What is current thinking re strategies in relation to food prices and food security?
Role of charities
Responsibility for studentship grants/awards which a group manages
Act as facilitator for consultations on range of issues
Increased synergy between charities possible "pool of funds"
Closer link relationships between charities and levyboards
Charity funding for more speculative projects but still "applied"
Defra Report from the
Agriculture Research Funding Conference
Innovation Centre, Reading
30th July 2008
This report provides a summary of a one-day Agricultural Research Funding Event, held at Reading Innovation Centre in July 2008. The purpose of this event was to bring key stakeholders and funders of research together to explore scope/mechanisms for innovation and closer co-operation. Thirty-four stakeholders and funders attended including representatives from government, research associations, agricultural research colleges and industry. A background to the history of the Research Priorities Group, agricultural R&D needs and an industry perspective were provided by Colin Dennis (CCFRA),David Leaver (Royal Agricultural College) and Sir Don Curry (Defra) respectively.
The structure of the workshop consisted of several interactive sessions whereby groups of attendees were asked to discuss and identify key challenges concerning agricultural research. Following this, groups were asked to come up with worthwhile suggestions for a specific challenge. The intended outcome of this work was to identify actions that will lead to increased synergies, achieve better value for money, whether public or private, from investment in agricultural research, and options for additional/alternative funding.
Key Challenges
Groups of attendees were asked to identify the main challenges concerning agricultural research. This section summarises those identified.
1. Translational research (translating under-pinning research into practical applications).
There is currently inadequate funding in the strategic and translational areas. Funding bodies that do provide translational research grants need to ensure that these are maintained (e.g. LINK) and that their roles are better clarified. The delivery of sufficient translational research will require the involvement of a wide range of research providers.
2. Co-ordination and focusing of R&D needs.
There is a need to join up agriculture and food R&D priorities to achieve a balance in the allocation of R&D resources in order to deliver sustainable, competitive and resilient farming and food industries. Better co-ordination will 1) permit more efficient utilisation of resources (scientists, knowledge, money) and 2) will allow researchers and research funders to react more rapidly to new issues.
3. Maintaining research capability/ expertise.
Mechanisms for attracting young people into a career in agricultural science are needed so that the UK agricultural research capability is maintained into the future. Incentives could include improved career structure, attractive pay and greater job security
4. Increasing productivity and delivering environmental/social goods
R&D is needed to help balance agricultural productivity with social, economic and environmental objectives. This needs to take place in the context of global changes in policy and food supply. Agriculture also needs to adapt to increasing oil prices. Research to develop farming methods/ new technologies will contribute towards the optimisation of land-use needed for efficient production with reduced reliance on non-renewable inputs.
5. Attracting industry funding.
Mechanisms for attracting more private sector and Levy Board funding are needed (i.e. by demonstrating economic return to farmers/ businesses and improving knowledge transfer from existing applied research). R&D in agriculture should be linked to end-product use and an effective procedure for identifying the science questions of relevance to industry should be developed.
Recommendations
Groups of workshop attendees were asked to come up with and present worthwhile suggestions to a particular challenge. Limitations and first steps to achieving these suggestions were also considered. The main themes are summarised below.
1. Challenge: Co-ordination and focusing of R&D needs
Suggestions:
An Agri-Food R&D Forum or Farming and Food Partnership Forum should be established with a "farm-to-fork" scope.
-
Forum members could include government (research councils, government departments, devolved authorities); Industry (AHDB, food and other relevant industry bodies); NGOs; Research Providers.
- The forum would provide better communication of each organisations' programmes and strategies. This would improve our ability to identify gaps/ synergies and enable prioritisation and more cost-effective funding.
- The forum would also encourage partnerships for new funding opportunities (e.g. overseas and other sectors).
- The forum would need a secretariat, clear terms of reference and a strategy for how it could influence. It should not be constitutional.
- A national vision for agricultural R&D should be established
Limitations:
There are already several forums in place.
Partners may set caveats which would take time to iron out.
Strong and visible leadership would be required.
First steps:
Establish a small group to undertake a scoping exercise.
Seek agreement from funding bodies.
Draw on experiences from the Environmental Research Funders Forum and Living With Environmental Change.
2. Challenge: Increasing productivity and delivering environmental goods
Suggestions:
An applied research team should be established in each of the main commodity 'areas' to run in parallel with existing strategic research teams to address current gaps.
- Their remit would include environmental and social factors as well as competitiveness.
- The teams would need a conceptual intellectual framework.
- Opportunities should be included to enable the incorporate of new crops.
Limitations:
This would necessitate a reallocation of funding from each institutions budget.
First steps:
Buy-in from policy-makers and key stakeholders needs to be sought.
Overseas models should be examined (e.g. the system in operation in California).
Start small and test for one or two commodities.
3. Challenge: Public/private partnership
Suggestions:
A public/ private partnership organisation should be established (e.g. AHDB plus match funds; a publicly funded ADAS).
- This organisation would have clear goals to deliver applied research.
- Generally, research institutions change their thinking away from pure science (RAE ratings) to applied science.
Limitations:
There may be resistance from pure scientists.
First steps:
A clear signal is needed from treasury for their commitment to balanced R&D funding which will enable applied research to create clear economic benefit for the UK.
4. Challenge: Improving understanding of environmental goods
Suggestions:
To develop a comprehensive understanding/ evaluation of environmental goods (and productivity).
- This would enable us to make decisions on trade-offs.
- Multi-disciplinary work should cross over between agricultural science, environmental science, economics and social science.
- Work would need to operate in the context of ecosystem services both locally and globally and take economic considerations into account.
- The research community needs to consider how to communicate the value of environmental goods.
Limitations:
We have different ideas and need a different approach to combine economics and environmental issues.
First steps:
To assess what we know economically and environmentally and to perform a gap analysis to bring these together.
5. Challenge: Maintaining research capability/expertise.
Suggestions:
More funding for applied research PhDs along with improved career structure and opportunities are needed to encourage more young people into agricultural science. This needs to be joint public/industry led.
- Applied research should be given the appropriate peer-esteem and career opportunities.
- PhD's in the Agricultural sector should be centrally managed.
- PhD's should be run with an MBA-like component to give students more business know-how.
Limitations:
It is currently difficult to encourage talented individuals into a research career.
First steps:
Increase the PhD stipend in line with the average graduate level salary.
6. Challenge: Communicating benefits of R&D
Suggestions:
The development of a set of criteria is needed to define/ measure the benefit of R&D to private (£) and/or public (goods).
- This is needed to communicate to a range of audiences (incl. the average tax-payer) the value/necessity of R&D investment.
- The positives and negatives (e.g. environmental and societal costs) need to be included.
Limitations:
This will be at different levels of understanding
There will be timescale issues as will have to go a long way back to identify the origin of research that is now paying dividends.
First steps:
To identify the target audiences and to evaluate their understanding and the benefits that they value.
7. Challenge: Soil research
Suggestions:
A higher profile should be accorded to soils as an essential national resource so that the importance of soils, as a key element of sustainable agricultural systems is fully appreciated.
- Soils have important roles in agricultural productivity, water quality, climate change (water retention, carbon storage, upland organic soils, N2O emissions, nitrogen inhibitors etc) and should be recognised in setting the research agenda.
First steps:
To develop/build on the national strategy for soils (and associated consequences on water and air quality) and the rebuilding of national capability.
To build on previously funded work in this area.
Actions:
- Defra to commission research to:
a) explore funding models being used in other countries and determine their potential for application in the UK;
b) explore how R&D is structured in other UK industries including balance of public-private support;
c) assess the value of R&D investment.
- This workshop report will be fed into a further 'Defra Evidence Investment Strategy Workshop' which is being held on 1-3rd September 2008. This workshop will explore in detail Defra's Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs), in particular, the identification of research gaps, horizon scanning to identify future opportunities/ threats for Defra and the opportunities for collaboration between funders.
- Defra to explore the possibility of setting up an 'Agri-food R&D Forum'. This recommendation follows a similar vision to the PM Strategy Unit Report 'Food Matters - Towards a Strategy for the 21st Century'.
|