Science research funding must stay at an arm’s length from corporate interests
Brexit threatens state funding of scientific research, which means we need greater caution about commercial interests
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Should science be privatised? Despite some fruitful and harmonious co-operation between state-sponsored research and the private companies who can make best use of it commercially – the technology clusters around Cambridge being the most high-profile example of this symbiosis – there is every reason to be cautious about the future course of collaboration.
The obvious impetus towards increased private-sector funding comes from the potential loss of public-sector cash from the EU, once Brexit becomes more of a reality. Although the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has pledged to match the shortfall, there is no guarantee that the same arrangements can be relied on in the same way in future. We also know that the public finances may well come under more intense pressure, which will make money from pharmaceutical and chemicals firms much more attractive to universities.
Hence the worries many scientists have that, for example, crucial research into the impact of pesticides such as neonicotinoids will become dependent on the very firms that manufacture them. There is deep disagreement about whether “neonics” have been responsible for the decline in bee populations; but the truth about this phenomenon may be more readily accepted if it emerges from truly independent research.
At a time, too, when so many researchers enjoy strong links with Europe, some of course moving to Britain from the rest of the EU, Britain needs to reassure them about the robustness and freedom of its academic centres of excellence. We do not want to suffer a sudden brain drain to Europe.
One of the lessons we should have learned from the global financial crash is that sometimes private-sector companies, with their vast resources and power to lobby governments, do not always operate in the best interest of the wider community. The financial sector was the most successful in using its money to protect its own interests, and of course there are grave concerns about how the EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, could make private companies unaccountable for their actions – and the latest indications suggest such concerns could jeopardise the entire deal.
Those engaged in scientific research understand the dangers only too well. They deserve support of all kinds.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments