It is easy enough to see the European Union as a monster that devours taxpayers’ money, but even hardened eurosceptics cannot fudge the figures showing the UK gets more out than it pays in for science and research. The UK is a global science power thanks in part to the EU.
Between 2007 and 2013 the UK contributed about €5.4 billion to the EU research budget and received €8.8 billion for UK research and innovation, making us the second-largest recipient after Germany.
Cash injections from the EU benefit universities, the NHS and science projects such as the EU’s Joint European Torus (JET) in Culham, Oxfordshire, which conducts world-leading fusion research. It is the EU’s largest facility in Britain. The European Commission’s latest five-year contract for JET is worth €283 million.
The benefits go beyond cash. Being in the EU helps Britain to attract the best scientists to do the cutting edge research that secures us these giant grants. The argument is circular, but it begins and ends with scientific brains – and global talent migrates to well-funded projects like bees to honey.
Staying ahead in a world where science is more expensive and more collaborative requires considerable investment. Genome research, large telescopes or cancer cures demand state-of-the-art facilities and, increasingly, access to big data unavailable to a science island.
“If we are part of the European Union, we are part of a powerhouse that can produce the data,” Sir Paul Nurse, director of the Francis Crick Institute in London, told the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology in January.
Reverse brain drain
In the 1980s British brains headed for the US to do big science. But according to Steve Cowley, chief executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority, the EU has since taken over the leadership mantle.
“The infrastructure and organisation in Europe have exceeded those of the US; and many great scientific instruments of our time are now in Europe,” he told the Lords committee.
Referring to the EU’s JET, which he runs, Cowley added: “We have American scientists battering down our doors because they want to work on our machine, because it goes to much more extreme conditions.”
John O’Keefe, a professor of Cognitive Neuroscience at UCL who won the 2014 Nobel prize for Medicine was born in the US, educated in Canada, but came to here for research.
Research collaboration
The UK is not just good at science. It is good at science leadership. UK universities are coordinating fully one-third of the projects funded by the EU’s €80 billion Horizon 2020 research programme for 2014-2020. Germany is taking the lead on 29 per cent. Other countries lag far behind.
Managing international partnerships brings not only significant additional funding to UK universities but also global prestige, which in turn helps us in the battle to attract top talent.
John O’Keefe, a professor of cognitive neuroscience, was born in the US and educated in Canada, but he chose to conduct the research that won him the 2014 Nobel prize for medicine at University College London. Russian-born Andre Geim and Kostantin Novoselov, who shared the 2010 Nobel prize in physics, discovered the properties of graphene working at Manchester University.
Switzerland’s relations with the EU are a cautionary tale for UK science. After Switzerland was unceremoniously kicked out of European research projects following a 2014 referendum to cap immigration, the government hurriedly found the cash to enable its universities to continue the partnerships. But it has already found that many scientists view the Swiss seal of approval as less prestigious than being funded by the EU. The lesson? Being cut off from top talent is a bigger blow for a rich country like Switzerland than losing EU funding.
Post-Brexit budget gap
Should the UK pull out of the EU, it may still be able to collaborate in EU science projects as an associate member, but it would have to pay for the privilege according to a formula based on its population and gross domestic product (GDP). And there is no guarantee the Treasury would act as Switzerland did to bridge the financing gap, other than for a few pet projects. As the National Audit Office said in a recent report, the UK finds it easier to launch eye-catching science schemes than to keep them going.
Want more InFacts?
Click here to get the newsletter
And all the time, other countries are pouring money into research. Germany now spends almost 3 per cent of GDP on science, dwarfing Britain’s 1.7 per cent. China on March 5 announced a 9 per cent rise in science spending this year to $41 billion as part of its strategy to become an innovation-led economy.
If it left the EU, the UK would remain a world leader in some research areas such as genomics, thanks to big data from the NHS. But Germany is poised to take overtake us in other fields. Whoever has the most money and the best talent will reap the benefits of discoveries and inventions. For Britain, now is not the time to squander hard-earned gains. Ditching Europe will mean relinquishing our status as a great science power.
Edited by Alan Wheatley
This piece is being published simultaneously on The Telegraph
Leave a Reply