- Email: [email protected]
Mind the gap: A bridge between industry and academia
Renewable Energy Focus Volume 18 April 2017
www.renewableenergyfocus.com
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Mind the gap: A bridge between industry and academia David Appleyard While academia may be considered as pure research and industry concerned only with commercial returns, the reality is considerably more nuanced. Building up the ties between industry and academia is key to maximising the value of research as seen through the lens of commercial development. ‘‘At its purest, academia is free of the constraints of needing to take product to market or work to industrial time lines,’’ muses Professor David Greenwood, of WMG, the International Automotive Research Centre at the University of Warwick, in the UK. He continues: ‘‘It is therefore free to investigate the potential of scientific breakthroughs and how they might come into the market in the future.’’ ‘‘Academia breaks down into really early stuff, which is not sector specific. Really researcher-led science: at the time the work is done, nobody is really quite sure, either whether the hypothesis that is being investigated is to be proved, or whether it will find an application and, if it does, which industry sector and which problems it will find its way into.’’ This view is echoed by Dr Jonathan Nixon, Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Engineering, Environment & Computing at Coventry University: ‘‘A lot of research done at universities isn’t necessarily going to lead to a product that can be commercialised. So you can’t always expect something back from it.’’ Greenwood contrasts this with the undiluted industrial perspective: ‘‘Industry inevitably has to be driven by the requirements of shareholders and is driven by quarterly profit targets, and shareholder value. So they put quite different behaviours into organisations, into how people will conduct research and development.’’ He explains though: ‘‘The reality is that it’s much more blurred than that. Typically industry will have both long time horizon and short time horizon research activities going on. They will have some quite clear understanding to what the technical issues and what the market problems are that they are trying to solve.’’ ‘‘Within academia you have got people who are pure science individual investigators. Then you have got organisations translating scientific discovery into industrial impact. Their role is understanding how it can be applied in an industrial context
for the first time and where the benefits might be and to work with the research laboratory or the research groups in industry.’’ Marko Palonen, Manager of the R&D Portfolio for the Pulp and Energy unit of Valmet Technologies Oy, expands on this nexus: ‘‘The balance of business, applied research and basic research is important – business makes tasks economically feasible, basic research finds novel things, ideas and know-how and applied research finds know-how that is relevant for business. There must be enough mass in all of the sectors to create an eco-system.’’ He continues: ‘‘In the middle are innovations that are novel, feasible and societally beneficial.’’
Collaboration between academia and organisations in the field can translate scientific discovery into industrial impact, making otherwise undiscovered research commercially available (image courtesy of Shutterstock). 1755-0084/ß 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2017.02.001
36
Nonetheless, Greenwood – who focuses on multidisciplinary academic activity directed towards industrial goals – observes: ‘‘There is this need to tie up the link from academic knowledge into what can come forward into products and solve problems that industry sees.’’ Nixon expands on this point: ‘‘I believe there needs to be a greater willingness to work with academia. I don’t think companies see the benefits of working with universities as they could do perhaps. There needs to be a better understanding of the benefits that bigger companies can gain from working with universities.’’
Bringing industry into the laboratory Major organisations do already work with academic organisations through activities such as sponsoring research for specific projects. Says Greenwood: ‘‘Larger companies will sponsor PhDs, universities, they may even have a research institute at universities which are looking at specific areas in the long-term future which are of interest to them. It’s much harder for small companies to afford to do that kind of thing.’’ But Palonen emphasises the benefits a close relationship with academia can bring to industry, such as access to a global research network, with resources and wide knowledge available, co-operative projects and groups, as well as potential funding. He also highlights how further bridges between industry and academia could be developed through mechanisms such as industry professorships, company involvement in lecturing, active alumni participation, mentoring, informal co-operation and brainstorming, and through start-ups. For example, Dr Tero Joronen, who has been working as a researcher for Finnish power, pulp and paper technology group Valmet since 1994, now divides his time between Valmet and Tampere University of Technology, where he was appointed as TUT Industry Professor last August. ‘‘What I will bring to TUT is insight into the needs and hopes of industry and quick remedies to product development needs,’’ says Joronen, who is currently working on the liquefaction of solid biomass. Greenwood further notes the major role that government can play in providing a doorway through which industry and academia can collaborate more effectively. ‘‘Government intervention can make a real difference. Government has a big role to play where the market has otherwise not created itself. Increasingly there are some really good government mechanisms being set up to promote collaboration between companies and research institutes.’’ He continues: ‘‘Things like the Energy Catalyst, which is a good example of a programme that’s designed to bring industry and academia together. In the EU, the Horizon 2020 programme had SME-led programmes which were aimed at bringing a like-minded group of SME’s together to work with the research institute and solve a problem that they collectively have.’’ Nixon also points to the role that government can play in facilitating collaboration between industry and academia where commercial return may not be immediately apparent: ‘‘Sometimes it can be difficult to get companies to agree and commit to projects. Funding agencies like Innovate UK are very good because they give money to both academia and industry to support bringing technologies to market.’’
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
‘‘Perhaps there needs to be more of that,’’ he says. Innovate UK is responsible for setting up a series of technology ‘Catapults’ over the last decade – non-profit technology and innovation centres that aim to bridge the gap between universities and businesses. Catapults – each of which specialises in a different area of technology such as Energy Systems – help businesses undertake late-stage R&D and commercialise traditional academic research by providing access to technical capabilities, equipment, and other resources. Other nations are also attempting to foster greater collaboration between research and industry. For instance, the CLIC Innovation non-profit company is owned by 30 companies and 17 universities and research institutes. Emerging from the Cluster for Energy and Environment in Finland and the Finnish Bioeconomy Cluster, CLIC Innovation is focused on the bioeconomy, energy and cleantech sectors. Among the shareholders are ABB, Foster Wheeler, Andritz, Valmet and Wa¨rtsila¨ alongside the Finnish Environment Institute, Tampere University of Technology, University of Helsinki, and the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Valmet, through the CLIC Innovation scheme, was working as part of the FLEXe (Flexible Energy Systems) programme which concluded at the end of April 2016, for example. Among other goals, this programme – which included 17 companies and 10 research institutes – related to the development of optimal operation and control strategies of power plants in a new flexible (renewables dominated) operating environment, as well as the control potential and restrictions of district heating networks as part of the future energy system. As Greenwood observes: ‘‘Typically companies either individually interact with the universities or they do so through these larger collaborative project mechanisms. They tend to use government-funded research support mechanisms to make that easier for them.’’ Nixon also highlights increasing budget constraints within the research community as a potential route for increased industry collaboration: ‘‘Funding opportunities through conventional routes like Research Councils UK are limited and highly competitive, so academics are seeking different routes to obtain funding,’’ he says.
Bridging the valley of death Given the key role organisations such as Innovate UK and CLIC have to play in commercialising research and early stage technology, a continued focus on achieving this goal is essential for technologies to bridge the much-feared pre-commercial valley of death. Here, promising technologies attempt to cross from proven tech and advanced prototyping, but fail to emerge on the other side as a commercial reality. As Greenwood explains: ‘‘If you look at the UK situation, we have a really good mechanism to support technology development, all the way from those really early TRLs [Technology Readiness Level] to the point we have got things coming quite close to production.’’ ‘‘For some sectors, for example the automotive and aerospace industry, we have got some really good organisations designed to fill that gap. They are very much focused on plugging what used to be called the valley of death.’’ 37
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Renewable Energy Focus Volume 18 April 2017
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Renewable Energy Focus Volume 18 April 2017
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
than perhaps they did in the past, and funding is available to work more commercially, so this has led to a focus on pre-commercialisation work.’’ He continues: ‘‘One of the positives is that energy is a focus area at the moment for funding agencies, so there is a good number of opportunities, even though generally speaking there isn’t enough money for research. I think it’s one of the better ones in terms for where the money is going at the moment.’’
Financing R&D for commercialisation
Some sectors such as the aerospace industry have a range of organisations that can assist in the transition from early-stage research or technology to commercial viability (image courtesy of Shutterstock).
He continues: ‘‘Basically the mechanism is a very good one, but there are some areas that could be strengthened. I would say the areas that could be strengthened are, that as a result of gradual real budget reductions for those organisations, inevitably each has had to focus a little bit more closely on their core mandates.’’ ‘‘There is a little bit of risk that we have a gap that grows where, we have technologies that academia have recognised as interesting and could be applied to a particular business problem. But, it isn’t developed far enough that industries are prepared to take the risk of investing money into it at this point in time.’’ ‘‘You may have a situation where one agency are not willing to fund the work because it’s seen as industrially relevant, and therefore no longer a scientific endeavour. However, it’s not quite developed far enough for industry to be able to take the lead and therefore Innovate UK can’t support it.’’ ‘‘So there is some activity needed in that kind of [technology feasibility] TRL 3, TRL 4 level to make sure we are actually pulling this stuff through from our academic organisations and making it work for us.’’ Another potential challenge concerns the role of intellectual property rights (IPR). As academia is typically centred on opensource research papers, there is potentially a conflict between raw science and possible commercial advantage. Robust agreements regarding IPR must also be in place for any commercial advances that may emerge from collaborative work, typically a rights or licensing agreement. Recognising this challenge, the UK’s Catapults claim to manage IP in an approach that ‘‘encourages collaborative working and helps the exploitation of IP. . . for the benefit of industry’’ but does not create burdensome costs for small companies. Nixon also suggests a shift among the academic community: ‘‘I think that a lot of what universities are trying to do at the moment is to change the stage at which they are doing their research. Academics are being encouraged to work with companies more
38
With traditional research resources becoming more focused, the need for collaborative work between industry and academia becomes more pressing, but commercial pressures remain undiminished. New routes to financing early-stage commercial development are also emerging though. Crowd-sourced funding platforms such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo have allowed numerous start-ups access to potential funding to bridge the gap to commercial reality. Such platforms may evolve to see pure research funded or more collaborative projects. Greenwood also points to another route to inject funding into academia-industry collaborations: ‘‘I would certainly say things like R&D tax incentives are quite attractive for organisations that are in that early stage of commercialisation. It’s not ideal for startoff organisations that might be pre-revenue, but there other investment mechanisms available to help encourage investors to take a position in early-stage tech companies. I think keeping those in place is certainly a good plan.’’ There is also no doubt there are some companies that are pushing their commitment to green technology and sustainability not for a return on their investment, but because their shareholders have an expectation that they will. As Nixon notes: ‘‘You do get companies that invest in projects as part of their corporate social responsibility [CSR]. But there are not that many companies that believe they can afford to do this, so we need more companies to take the lead and demonstrate the benefits that this can be realised for both industry and society.’’ Whether novel mechanisms like crowd funding, R&D bonds or another new financial instrument emerges to support the commercialisation of early stage technology and research remains to be seen. Greenwood though is pragmatic: ‘‘The challenge at the moment is around affordability. In the short-term it’s a cost to government, the pay back comes in years to come and it could be five years out, it could be 10 years out in some cases. Cleary, in short-term budgeting we can’t afford to open the flood gates on the money. It is having to be targeted quite carefully in the areas that will give the best returns in the short and medium-term.’’ He concludes: ‘‘It’s just a question of making sure we keep our focus on funding of, particularly, science and the early stage companies that spring out from that.’’ ABOUT THE AUTHOR David Appleyard is a freelance journalist focused on energy and technology.
www.renewableenergyfocus.com
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Mind the gap: A bridge between industry and academia David Appleyard While academia may be considered as pure research and industry concerned only with commercial returns, the reality is considerably more nuanced. Building up the ties between industry and academia is key to maximising the value of research as seen through the lens of commercial development. ‘‘At its purest, academia is free of the constraints of needing to take product to market or work to industrial time lines,’’ muses Professor David Greenwood, of WMG, the International Automotive Research Centre at the University of Warwick, in the UK. He continues: ‘‘It is therefore free to investigate the potential of scientific breakthroughs and how they might come into the market in the future.’’ ‘‘Academia breaks down into really early stuff, which is not sector specific. Really researcher-led science: at the time the work is done, nobody is really quite sure, either whether the hypothesis that is being investigated is to be proved, or whether it will find an application and, if it does, which industry sector and which problems it will find its way into.’’ This view is echoed by Dr Jonathan Nixon, Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Engineering, Environment & Computing at Coventry University: ‘‘A lot of research done at universities isn’t necessarily going to lead to a product that can be commercialised. So you can’t always expect something back from it.’’ Greenwood contrasts this with the undiluted industrial perspective: ‘‘Industry inevitably has to be driven by the requirements of shareholders and is driven by quarterly profit targets, and shareholder value. So they put quite different behaviours into organisations, into how people will conduct research and development.’’ He explains though: ‘‘The reality is that it’s much more blurred than that. Typically industry will have both long time horizon and short time horizon research activities going on. They will have some quite clear understanding to what the technical issues and what the market problems are that they are trying to solve.’’ ‘‘Within academia you have got people who are pure science individual investigators. Then you have got organisations translating scientific discovery into industrial impact. Their role is understanding how it can be applied in an industrial context
for the first time and where the benefits might be and to work with the research laboratory or the research groups in industry.’’ Marko Palonen, Manager of the R&D Portfolio for the Pulp and Energy unit of Valmet Technologies Oy, expands on this nexus: ‘‘The balance of business, applied research and basic research is important – business makes tasks economically feasible, basic research finds novel things, ideas and know-how and applied research finds know-how that is relevant for business. There must be enough mass in all of the sectors to create an eco-system.’’ He continues: ‘‘In the middle are innovations that are novel, feasible and societally beneficial.’’
Collaboration between academia and organisations in the field can translate scientific discovery into industrial impact, making otherwise undiscovered research commercially available (image courtesy of Shutterstock). 1755-0084/ß 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2017.02.001
36
Nonetheless, Greenwood – who focuses on multidisciplinary academic activity directed towards industrial goals – observes: ‘‘There is this need to tie up the link from academic knowledge into what can come forward into products and solve problems that industry sees.’’ Nixon expands on this point: ‘‘I believe there needs to be a greater willingness to work with academia. I don’t think companies see the benefits of working with universities as they could do perhaps. There needs to be a better understanding of the benefits that bigger companies can gain from working with universities.’’
Bringing industry into the laboratory Major organisations do already work with academic organisations through activities such as sponsoring research for specific projects. Says Greenwood: ‘‘Larger companies will sponsor PhDs, universities, they may even have a research institute at universities which are looking at specific areas in the long-term future which are of interest to them. It’s much harder for small companies to afford to do that kind of thing.’’ But Palonen emphasises the benefits a close relationship with academia can bring to industry, such as access to a global research network, with resources and wide knowledge available, co-operative projects and groups, as well as potential funding. He also highlights how further bridges between industry and academia could be developed through mechanisms such as industry professorships, company involvement in lecturing, active alumni participation, mentoring, informal co-operation and brainstorming, and through start-ups. For example, Dr Tero Joronen, who has been working as a researcher for Finnish power, pulp and paper technology group Valmet since 1994, now divides his time between Valmet and Tampere University of Technology, where he was appointed as TUT Industry Professor last August. ‘‘What I will bring to TUT is insight into the needs and hopes of industry and quick remedies to product development needs,’’ says Joronen, who is currently working on the liquefaction of solid biomass. Greenwood further notes the major role that government can play in providing a doorway through which industry and academia can collaborate more effectively. ‘‘Government intervention can make a real difference. Government has a big role to play where the market has otherwise not created itself. Increasingly there are some really good government mechanisms being set up to promote collaboration between companies and research institutes.’’ He continues: ‘‘Things like the Energy Catalyst, which is a good example of a programme that’s designed to bring industry and academia together. In the EU, the Horizon 2020 programme had SME-led programmes which were aimed at bringing a like-minded group of SME’s together to work with the research institute and solve a problem that they collectively have.’’ Nixon also points to the role that government can play in facilitating collaboration between industry and academia where commercial return may not be immediately apparent: ‘‘Sometimes it can be difficult to get companies to agree and commit to projects. Funding agencies like Innovate UK are very good because they give money to both academia and industry to support bringing technologies to market.’’
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
‘‘Perhaps there needs to be more of that,’’ he says. Innovate UK is responsible for setting up a series of technology ‘Catapults’ over the last decade – non-profit technology and innovation centres that aim to bridge the gap between universities and businesses. Catapults – each of which specialises in a different area of technology such as Energy Systems – help businesses undertake late-stage R&D and commercialise traditional academic research by providing access to technical capabilities, equipment, and other resources. Other nations are also attempting to foster greater collaboration between research and industry. For instance, the CLIC Innovation non-profit company is owned by 30 companies and 17 universities and research institutes. Emerging from the Cluster for Energy and Environment in Finland and the Finnish Bioeconomy Cluster, CLIC Innovation is focused on the bioeconomy, energy and cleantech sectors. Among the shareholders are ABB, Foster Wheeler, Andritz, Valmet and Wa¨rtsila¨ alongside the Finnish Environment Institute, Tampere University of Technology, University of Helsinki, and the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Valmet, through the CLIC Innovation scheme, was working as part of the FLEXe (Flexible Energy Systems) programme which concluded at the end of April 2016, for example. Among other goals, this programme – which included 17 companies and 10 research institutes – related to the development of optimal operation and control strategies of power plants in a new flexible (renewables dominated) operating environment, as well as the control potential and restrictions of district heating networks as part of the future energy system. As Greenwood observes: ‘‘Typically companies either individually interact with the universities or they do so through these larger collaborative project mechanisms. They tend to use government-funded research support mechanisms to make that easier for them.’’ Nixon also highlights increasing budget constraints within the research community as a potential route for increased industry collaboration: ‘‘Funding opportunities through conventional routes like Research Councils UK are limited and highly competitive, so academics are seeking different routes to obtain funding,’’ he says.
Bridging the valley of death Given the key role organisations such as Innovate UK and CLIC have to play in commercialising research and early stage technology, a continued focus on achieving this goal is essential for technologies to bridge the much-feared pre-commercial valley of death. Here, promising technologies attempt to cross from proven tech and advanced prototyping, but fail to emerge on the other side as a commercial reality. As Greenwood explains: ‘‘If you look at the UK situation, we have a really good mechanism to support technology development, all the way from those really early TRLs [Technology Readiness Level] to the point we have got things coming quite close to production.’’ ‘‘For some sectors, for example the automotive and aerospace industry, we have got some really good organisations designed to fill that gap. They are very much focused on plugging what used to be called the valley of death.’’ 37
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Renewable Energy Focus Volume 18 April 2017
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
Renewable Energy Focus Volume 18 April 2017
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
than perhaps they did in the past, and funding is available to work more commercially, so this has led to a focus on pre-commercialisation work.’’ He continues: ‘‘One of the positives is that energy is a focus area at the moment for funding agencies, so there is a good number of opportunities, even though generally speaking there isn’t enough money for research. I think it’s one of the better ones in terms for where the money is going at the moment.’’
Financing R&D for commercialisation
Some sectors such as the aerospace industry have a range of organisations that can assist in the transition from early-stage research or technology to commercial viability (image courtesy of Shutterstock).
He continues: ‘‘Basically the mechanism is a very good one, but there are some areas that could be strengthened. I would say the areas that could be strengthened are, that as a result of gradual real budget reductions for those organisations, inevitably each has had to focus a little bit more closely on their core mandates.’’ ‘‘There is a little bit of risk that we have a gap that grows where, we have technologies that academia have recognised as interesting and could be applied to a particular business problem. But, it isn’t developed far enough that industries are prepared to take the risk of investing money into it at this point in time.’’ ‘‘You may have a situation where one agency are not willing to fund the work because it’s seen as industrially relevant, and therefore no longer a scientific endeavour. However, it’s not quite developed far enough for industry to be able to take the lead and therefore Innovate UK can’t support it.’’ ‘‘So there is some activity needed in that kind of [technology feasibility] TRL 3, TRL 4 level to make sure we are actually pulling this stuff through from our academic organisations and making it work for us.’’ Another potential challenge concerns the role of intellectual property rights (IPR). As academia is typically centred on opensource research papers, there is potentially a conflict between raw science and possible commercial advantage. Robust agreements regarding IPR must also be in place for any commercial advances that may emerge from collaborative work, typically a rights or licensing agreement. Recognising this challenge, the UK’s Catapults claim to manage IP in an approach that ‘‘encourages collaborative working and helps the exploitation of IP. . . for the benefit of industry’’ but does not create burdensome costs for small companies. Nixon also suggests a shift among the academic community: ‘‘I think that a lot of what universities are trying to do at the moment is to change the stage at which they are doing their research. Academics are being encouraged to work with companies more
38
With traditional research resources becoming more focused, the need for collaborative work between industry and academia becomes more pressing, but commercial pressures remain undiminished. New routes to financing early-stage commercial development are also emerging though. Crowd-sourced funding platforms such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo have allowed numerous start-ups access to potential funding to bridge the gap to commercial reality. Such platforms may evolve to see pure research funded or more collaborative projects. Greenwood also points to another route to inject funding into academia-industry collaborations: ‘‘I would certainly say things like R&D tax incentives are quite attractive for organisations that are in that early stage of commercialisation. It’s not ideal for startoff organisations that might be pre-revenue, but there other investment mechanisms available to help encourage investors to take a position in early-stage tech companies. I think keeping those in place is certainly a good plan.’’ There is also no doubt there are some companies that are pushing their commitment to green technology and sustainability not for a return on their investment, but because their shareholders have an expectation that they will. As Nixon notes: ‘‘You do get companies that invest in projects as part of their corporate social responsibility [CSR]. But there are not that many companies that believe they can afford to do this, so we need more companies to take the lead and demonstrate the benefits that this can be realised for both industry and society.’’ Whether novel mechanisms like crowd funding, R&D bonds or another new financial instrument emerges to support the commercialisation of early stage technology and research remains to be seen. Greenwood though is pragmatic: ‘‘The challenge at the moment is around affordability. In the short-term it’s a cost to government, the pay back comes in years to come and it could be five years out, it could be 10 years out in some cases. Cleary, in short-term budgeting we can’t afford to open the flood gates on the money. It is having to be targeted quite carefully in the areas that will give the best returns in the short and medium-term.’’ He concludes: ‘‘It’s just a question of making sure we keep our focus on funding of, particularly, science and the early stage companies that spring out from that.’’ ABOUT THE AUTHOR David Appleyard is a freelance journalist focused on energy and technology.