- Email: [email protected]
Public funding of research and development: a broad picture
76
BL- and CL-based diagnostic kits, monitoring, analysis and imaging systems on the market. The next symposium is planned for March 1993, in Banff, Canada (contact: Dr A. A. Szalay, Dept Plant Molecular Genetics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada T6G 2H7). In the meantime however,
TIBTECH- MARCH1991[Vol.9]
there is the proposal to set up a society to promote the science of bioluminescence and chemiluminescence. Interested persons should contact either: Dr A. K. Campbell Fax {44) 222 766276, Te~. (44) 222 742951; or Dr P. Stanley Fax (44) 223 461777, Tel. (44) 223 460888.
Acknowledgements I am grateful to Philip Stanley and Claire Hooper for their helpful comments on the manuscript, and to Claire Hooper for providing the photographs in Fig. 1. CLARE ROBINSON
Trends in Biotechnology
budget in five years. This excellent provision for civil research has brought difficult choices {choices that European science base organizations nevertheless would dearly love to be able to m a k e ) i n that pressures are strong to renew the infrastructure - buildings and facilities - as well as the inevitable demand of many small, deserving Discovery and invention spring from dominated by the contribution of programmes and projects. that unstable mixture of curiosity, private enterprise, but the investThe NIH budget represents the excitement, ambition and obsession ment by the USA in civil research ]crgest single source of funding for that is nurtured in institutes of makes an eloquent statement (if any- basic science research in the world higher education and civil research. one needs it), about the importance and the politics of spending it All industries and most central of US basic science on a world scale. should create its own momentum to governments have taken to heart the Despite a huge Federal budget defi- end the hiatus in the NIH adminislesson that today's discovery is cit, US scientists have good cause tration by the appointment of a new tomorrow's economic opportunity. to celebrate, with average increases director. Both are concerned to see invest- of civil research spending of 10% in Whatever the domestic politics, ment in research in the public sector. this year's budget: NIH £4.61) the continued strong US science Private and public initiatives in (£4.89m for human genome research funding situation will increase the basic research are increasing sub- programme); NASA £7.7b; DoE movement of trained scientists to the stantially as we enter the final £2.0b; NSF £1.3b; (NB £1 : US$1.8) USA from Europe and elsewhere in decade of this century. Last month (b = billion = 109; m = million = the world. Not much of this money this column wrung metaphorical 106). The increase in the NIH budget will be effective outside the US, but hands over the poor showing of the has a lot to do with the popularity of there are indications that private UK in public funding of research and biomedical science research in foundations are beginning to look development (R&D) {TIBTECH 9, Washington through the effective overseas. The Howard Hughes p. 47, 1991). What is happening lobbying of groups such as the Medical Institutes are said to be elsewhere? Association of American Univer- considering the option of overseas sities and the American Association grant applications in one or two Funding for research and of Medical Colleges. The NSF has year's time. development on a world scale also done well (despite a last-minute Money for civil research is well Figures from the Organization for cut of $22m), nearly doubling its down in the league table of one of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are the most com- --Table I plete and, although a little dated, reflect the current league positions OECDa figures for scientific research funding in the major nations of major scientific nations (Table 1). In 1991, the spending on R&D as a Country Total R&D a Public funding percentage of GDP (gross domestic (% GDP) a (£ billions) b (£ billions) b product) is rising significantly, with Japan 2.9 73 5 the UK still at the bottom of the USA 2.86 41 15.6 league table. It is particularly worryGermany 2.83 20 7 ing, as described in last month's France 2.29 13 5 Biotopics (op. cit) that although most UK 2.23 10 4 industrially developed nations are increasing their funding of civil aAbbreviations: OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Develresearch well beyond the threshold opment; GDP, gross domestic product; R&D, research and development. 1 billion - 10~. of inflation, that of the UK remains static. The figures m Table 1 are
Public funding of research and development: a broad picture
~) 1991. ElsevierScience PublishersLtd (UK) 0167-9430/91152.00
TIBTECH - MARCH 1991 [Vol. 9]
the world's economic superpowers, Japan. However, there are current moves to increase the subvention of funds for civil research. As an example, MITI (the Ministry of International Trade and Industry) was successful in the recent budget in obtaining an extra 26b yen per year for the Japan Key Technology Centre (Japan Key-TEC). One of the early projects of Japan Key-TEC was the Protein Engineering Research Institute (PERI) formed as a consortium with 14 industries to support pure and applied research in protein engineering. Interestingly, money for this came from dividends in government-held shares of a recently privatized domestic telecommunications company. Is there a lesson here for the UK government who have recently privatized the electricity industry with massive oversubscription for shares? Obviously, the bulk of money for R&D is in the hands of private industry. Japan has the largest investment by far, but not all of this is being spent in Japan. Much will be spent in the USA, and some money is coming to Europe, especially the UK. An example is £50m invested in buildings and revenue for new laboratories at University College London by Eisai Pharmaceuticals. As in the case of American investment (Squibb, Monsanto etc.) this is good for British scientists but perhaps not so good for the long-term UK economy, since most commitments are finite (5-15 years) and intellectual property rights will be assigned elsewhere. It was concern for the economic strength of Japan and the USA that led the Council of Ministers of the European Community (EC) to attempt to stimulate, co-ordinate and direct supranational R&D in the EC by way of the Framework programmes for civil research, of which the third was established in 1990. This brings in £3.8t) which together with the residue from the second framework programme, makes up some £5b. Competition for EC funding is strong because the rules are less concerned than those of national grant programmes with the nature of the collaborating partners, with the proviso that the projects must be supranational. There is a strong emphasis on engineering, electronics
77
--Glossary BRIDGE- Biotechnology Research for Innovation Development and Growth in Europe. COMEIT - Community Action Programme for Education and Training for Technology. INSERM - Institut National d~, la Sante et Recherche M~dicale. SCIENCE -Stimulation de Coop6ration Internationale et des Echanges Ndcessaires aux Chercheurs en Europe.
and information technology, but biotechnology has been a priority in recent years. The BRIDGE (see Glossary) biotechnology initiative (1990-1994) was allocated £100m, biomedicine had £89m, the human genome programme £10m and SCIENCE, £111m (SCIENCE, however, is due to end in 1992). Significant investment is also being made in investigating the provision, training and mobility of technologists in Europe through the COMETT initiative. For example, £235 600 is being provided for a Europe-wide study of manpower and training requirements for biotechnology, co-ordinated through a secretariat at the UK Biochemical Society, London. The civil science subventions of national EC governments look fairly healthy apart from that of the UK. Germany's remains strong but the country has obvious economic constraints in the present decade, and so
France is emerging as one of the strongest EC scientific nations. The government has pledged to take investment in national R&D to 3% of the GDP by the end of the decade. The national centre for scientific research (CNRS) has the largest single basic science budget (£!b). The engineering of biological macromolecules is defined as one of their priority areas. The medical and health research agency (INSERM) has a 10% increase this year to £0.2b including £11m for AIDS-directed research. This country seems set to take a lead role in Europe high technology, being involved in 156 out of 386 EC EUREKA projects
(collaborative research programmes supporting near-market research). MICHAEL J. GEISOW
Biodigm, 115 Main Street, E. Bridgford, Nottingham NG13 8NH, UK.
Biotopics Biotopics is the place in TIBTECH which will address and comment upon topics of current interest to biotechnology. Should you wish to contribute to this~column, to provide informed comment on topics featured, or suggest topics you would like to see covered in future Biotopics, please write to: Dr Clare Robinson (Editor),
Trends in Biotechnoiogy, Elsevier Trends Journals, 68 Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 1LA, UK.
TIBTECH also welcomes letters to the editor on all topics of interest to biotechnologists.
BL- and CL-based diagnostic kits, monitoring, analysis and imaging systems on the market. The next symposium is planned for March 1993, in Banff, Canada (contact: Dr A. A. Szalay, Dept Plant Molecular Genetics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada T6G 2H7). In the meantime however,
TIBTECH- MARCH1991[Vol.9]
there is the proposal to set up a society to promote the science of bioluminescence and chemiluminescence. Interested persons should contact either: Dr A. K. Campbell Fax {44) 222 766276, Te~. (44) 222 742951; or Dr P. Stanley Fax (44) 223 461777, Tel. (44) 223 460888.
Acknowledgements I am grateful to Philip Stanley and Claire Hooper for their helpful comments on the manuscript, and to Claire Hooper for providing the photographs in Fig. 1. CLARE ROBINSON
Trends in Biotechnology
budget in five years. This excellent provision for civil research has brought difficult choices {choices that European science base organizations nevertheless would dearly love to be able to m a k e ) i n that pressures are strong to renew the infrastructure - buildings and facilities - as well as the inevitable demand of many small, deserving Discovery and invention spring from dominated by the contribution of programmes and projects. that unstable mixture of curiosity, private enterprise, but the investThe NIH budget represents the excitement, ambition and obsession ment by the USA in civil research ]crgest single source of funding for that is nurtured in institutes of makes an eloquent statement (if any- basic science research in the world higher education and civil research. one needs it), about the importance and the politics of spending it All industries and most central of US basic science on a world scale. should create its own momentum to governments have taken to heart the Despite a huge Federal budget defi- end the hiatus in the NIH adminislesson that today's discovery is cit, US scientists have good cause tration by the appointment of a new tomorrow's economic opportunity. to celebrate, with average increases director. Both are concerned to see invest- of civil research spending of 10% in Whatever the domestic politics, ment in research in the public sector. this year's budget: NIH £4.61) the continued strong US science Private and public initiatives in (£4.89m for human genome research funding situation will increase the basic research are increasing sub- programme); NASA £7.7b; DoE movement of trained scientists to the stantially as we enter the final £2.0b; NSF £1.3b; (NB £1 : US$1.8) USA from Europe and elsewhere in decade of this century. Last month (b = billion = 109; m = million = the world. Not much of this money this column wrung metaphorical 106). The increase in the NIH budget will be effective outside the US, but hands over the poor showing of the has a lot to do with the popularity of there are indications that private UK in public funding of research and biomedical science research in foundations are beginning to look development (R&D) {TIBTECH 9, Washington through the effective overseas. The Howard Hughes p. 47, 1991). What is happening lobbying of groups such as the Medical Institutes are said to be elsewhere? Association of American Univer- considering the option of overseas sities and the American Association grant applications in one or two Funding for research and of Medical Colleges. The NSF has year's time. development on a world scale also done well (despite a last-minute Money for civil research is well Figures from the Organization for cut of $22m), nearly doubling its down in the league table of one of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are the most com- --Table I plete and, although a little dated, reflect the current league positions OECDa figures for scientific research funding in the major nations of major scientific nations (Table 1). In 1991, the spending on R&D as a Country Total R&D a Public funding percentage of GDP (gross domestic (% GDP) a (£ billions) b (£ billions) b product) is rising significantly, with Japan 2.9 73 5 the UK still at the bottom of the USA 2.86 41 15.6 league table. It is particularly worryGermany 2.83 20 7 ing, as described in last month's France 2.29 13 5 Biotopics (op. cit) that although most UK 2.23 10 4 industrially developed nations are increasing their funding of civil aAbbreviations: OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Develresearch well beyond the threshold opment; GDP, gross domestic product; R&D, research and development. 1 billion - 10~. of inflation, that of the UK remains static. The figures m Table 1 are
Public funding of research and development: a broad picture
~) 1991. ElsevierScience PublishersLtd (UK) 0167-9430/91152.00
TIBTECH - MARCH 1991 [Vol. 9]
the world's economic superpowers, Japan. However, there are current moves to increase the subvention of funds for civil research. As an example, MITI (the Ministry of International Trade and Industry) was successful in the recent budget in obtaining an extra 26b yen per year for the Japan Key Technology Centre (Japan Key-TEC). One of the early projects of Japan Key-TEC was the Protein Engineering Research Institute (PERI) formed as a consortium with 14 industries to support pure and applied research in protein engineering. Interestingly, money for this came from dividends in government-held shares of a recently privatized domestic telecommunications company. Is there a lesson here for the UK government who have recently privatized the electricity industry with massive oversubscription for shares? Obviously, the bulk of money for R&D is in the hands of private industry. Japan has the largest investment by far, but not all of this is being spent in Japan. Much will be spent in the USA, and some money is coming to Europe, especially the UK. An example is £50m invested in buildings and revenue for new laboratories at University College London by Eisai Pharmaceuticals. As in the case of American investment (Squibb, Monsanto etc.) this is good for British scientists but perhaps not so good for the long-term UK economy, since most commitments are finite (5-15 years) and intellectual property rights will be assigned elsewhere. It was concern for the economic strength of Japan and the USA that led the Council of Ministers of the European Community (EC) to attempt to stimulate, co-ordinate and direct supranational R&D in the EC by way of the Framework programmes for civil research, of which the third was established in 1990. This brings in £3.8t) which together with the residue from the second framework programme, makes up some £5b. Competition for EC funding is strong because the rules are less concerned than those of national grant programmes with the nature of the collaborating partners, with the proviso that the projects must be supranational. There is a strong emphasis on engineering, electronics
77
--Glossary BRIDGE- Biotechnology Research for Innovation Development and Growth in Europe. COMEIT - Community Action Programme for Education and Training for Technology. INSERM - Institut National d~, la Sante et Recherche M~dicale. SCIENCE -Stimulation de Coop6ration Internationale et des Echanges Ndcessaires aux Chercheurs en Europe.
and information technology, but biotechnology has been a priority in recent years. The BRIDGE (see Glossary) biotechnology initiative (1990-1994) was allocated £100m, biomedicine had £89m, the human genome programme £10m and SCIENCE, £111m (SCIENCE, however, is due to end in 1992). Significant investment is also being made in investigating the provision, training and mobility of technologists in Europe through the COMETT initiative. For example, £235 600 is being provided for a Europe-wide study of manpower and training requirements for biotechnology, co-ordinated through a secretariat at the UK Biochemical Society, London. The civil science subventions of national EC governments look fairly healthy apart from that of the UK. Germany's remains strong but the country has obvious economic constraints in the present decade, and so
France is emerging as one of the strongest EC scientific nations. The government has pledged to take investment in national R&D to 3% of the GDP by the end of the decade. The national centre for scientific research (CNRS) has the largest single basic science budget (£!b). The engineering of biological macromolecules is defined as one of their priority areas. The medical and health research agency (INSERM) has a 10% increase this year to £0.2b including £11m for AIDS-directed research. This country seems set to take a lead role in Europe high technology, being involved in 156 out of 386 EC EUREKA projects
(collaborative research programmes supporting near-market research). MICHAEL J. GEISOW
Biodigm, 115 Main Street, E. Bridgford, Nottingham NG13 8NH, UK.
Biotopics Biotopics is the place in TIBTECH which will address and comment upon topics of current interest to biotechnology. Should you wish to contribute to this~column, to provide informed comment on topics featured, or suggest topics you would like to see covered in future Biotopics, please write to: Dr Clare Robinson (Editor),
Trends in Biotechnoiogy, Elsevier Trends Journals, 68 Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 1LA, UK.
TIBTECH also welcomes letters to the editor on all topics of interest to biotechnologists.