BRITAIN鈥檚 chief scientist is preparing to scrap research that has failed to
impress during the government鈥檚 Technology Foresight Programme. The idea of
foresight programmes is to focus government research spending on those areas
which are likely to have commercial applications in 10 to 20 years鈥� time. But
the lists of priorities will be matched by lists of 鈥渘egative priorities鈥�, or
鈥减辞蝉迟别谤颈辞谤颈迟颈别蝉鈥�.
鈥淔or the first time, we in the UK are taking a conscious decision that we
cannot do everything that is possible in science, engineering and technology,鈥�
says Bill Stewart, the government鈥檚 chief scientist. 鈥淭his has been staring us
in the face for too long, but no one was prepared to bite the bullet
hitherto,鈥� he says.
鈥淐hoices have to be made,鈥� says Stewart in a report published this week.
The report stems from a foresight 鈥渇orum鈥� held in London last month, which was
attended by more than 300 scientists, civil servants and industrialists.
Stewart says 15 鈥渟ector panels鈥� are now drawing up lists of priorities in
individual subjects, such as communications, energy, agriculture and
transport.
Advertisement
A steering group, chaired by Stewart, will make a final selection early
next year. In May, its list will go to the Cabinet for approval, and ministers
will then be asked to adjust their departmental research programmes to reflect
the new priorities.
鈥淕overnment departments will be expected to implement that policy,鈥� says
Stewart. Research councils and universities will also be asked to focus
spending on the priority areas.
Some scientists warn of the dangers of closing down whole areas of
research. Ben Martin of the Science Policy Research Unit at the University of
Sussex, who coined the term 鈥減osteriority鈥�, says that dropping an area
completely is risky. 鈥淎 scaling down of effort in areas of low priority should
preserve the skill-base, enabling re-entry [to that field] if priorities alter
in the future.鈥�