Let’s Hope We Can All Stick to Science

There was a collective sigh of relief when it was announced that the UK would commit to Association for Horizon Europe. We knew the details had to be worked out, but we assumed the commitment was as good as a signature. Not so. Somehow science has got tangled up with completely different issues and association appears to be being held as hostage in the negotiations. It isn’t just the UK that is entangled, but also Switzerland. It isn’t the first time that Switzerland has lost access to a Horizon programme. This also happened back in 2014 when there was a period of total exclusion from Horizon 2020 followed by a partial re-entry until full association was agreed in 2016. Now Switzerland is back in the same wilderness as the UK.

The story of what happened to Switzerland previously has always been an indicator of what fate might face the UK. The negotiations dragging on just cause more and more concern: all the collaborations that might have been happily forged are placed – possibly permanently – on ice; the Europeans who might have brought their talents to the UK will be thinking even harder about how wise such a move might be; the early career researchers for whom the ERC Starter Grants have provided such an important leg-up at the start of their career have lost that route to early funding independence. The UK science base (and equivalently Switzerland) is already losing scientific ground and it may get much worse.

George Freeman, as Science Minister, has suggested we need a Plan B, ready to come into operation in April in case Association fails. The implication is that, since the cash is on the table, UK scientists won’t care whether it comes from within the UK or beyond its borders. I feel this is missing the point, certainly about the ERC, for the following reasons:

  • EU citizens have come to work in universities here in the past, knowing they would be as able to obtain funding from the ERC as if they stayed in their home countries. They came, because they saw other advantages in being in the UK. Now, those who might have been thinking of moving will feel (never mind visa costs etc) much less reason to come. Those who are already here will be less willing to stay, as a prestigious source of funds will be denied to them. Just last week the THE wrote about an expected ‘exodus’ of EU researchers if we fail to associate. Last summer they wrote about EU researchers ‘losing interest’ in UK jobs.
  • I use that word ‘prestigious’ advisedly. There is no doubt that holding an ERC grant is held in more esteem than any sort of UKRI grant. The reason for this is obvious. The competition is fierce and the refereeing highly international by experts from around the world. In my experience, a promotions panel looks much more favourably on an applicant with an ERC grant than on a standard UK-based responsive mode grant.
  • International referees are, moreover, willing to spend days in Brussels (or at least, they were pre-pandemic) doing a thorough job. It is a big commitment, yet one researchers from way outside the EU are willing to take on. I’ve watched them in action, back in the days I was an ERC Scientific Council member. Do they come to the UK for UKRI panels? Are they even asked to referee proposals pre-panel? The answer is, not much.

Ultimately, we may have to have a Plan B. Of course, that has always been the danger and the money has been committed. However, there has been plenty of time to think this one through, since long before the Brexit agreement was signed, and the reality is that it is far from trivial to think how to construct and operate a large-scale new scheme that would deliver anything comparable. I find it unconvincing to imply such a thing could be up and running in a couple of months. UKRI itself is under the current scrutiny of the Grant Review and might feel now was not the moment to take on another huge responsibility.

So, let’s Stick to Science, say a large number of individuals and bodies. Initiated by the wider European community and launched today, this online campaign urges individuals and organisations to sign up to

‘request that the European Council, Parliament, Commission, as well as European Union (EU) Member States, and the governments of the UK and Switzerland, recognise that advancement in R&I is best achieved when all actors in science and innovation work together across geographic boundaries.’

They – and all who sign – are

‘calling for open and barrier-free collaboration among Europe’s research and innovation (R&I) actors, who all share the same values. The initiative is an active response to the delayed  progression of association agreements with Switzerland and the United Kingdom (UK), which are being held up by political barriers that have nothing to do with science.’

That last sentence is key. As a former ERC Scientific Council member, I was pleased to be invited to be one of the first signatories. This isn’t just a campaign that matters to the UK and Switzerland; it is one that has impact across Europe and affects researchers in every country. Beyond the ERC itself, collaborations funded under different EU instruments of Horizon Europe (and its predecessors) are hugely important in solving the pressing problems of today. Excluding any country weakens what can be achieved, since the key scientist may be ineligible to be involved.

I hope many of the readers of this blog will consider signing up (here), to demonstrate the belief they share in the importance of international science and its relevance to achieving important societal ends.

This entry was posted in Science Funding and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.