INTRODUCTION

  The Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) is the qualifying body for the civil engineering profession. Founded in 1818 and granted a Royal Charter in 1928, the ICE now has over 80,000 members, a fifth of whom are based overseas. The ICE is a registered charity and a non-profit making organisation.

SUMMARY

—  Investment by the industry in research and innovation is low, due to low profit margins.

—  Dissemination of research findings is poor.

—  Long term funding for stated aims, which can only be provided by Government, must be increased.

—  Intellectual property rights should remain with the author and patent rights should be the property of the patentee.

—  Joint funding is inhibited by companies' lack of motivation.

—  Positive routes for funding by managed programmes continue to emerge. However, less prescriptive criteria for funding are needed, especially to encourage the involvement of small and medium sized enterprises.

—  There is a lack of funding for demonstrator or prototype applications of new technological advances.

—  The Foresight exercise needs to be improved so as to provide focused aims for future research.

—  An emphasis on process rather than technological fix is needed.

1.  Industrial application of Government-funded research

  1.1  Investment in the research and development process and its applications is ultimately financed by the purchasers of products and services provided by the industry. To create and sustain an active research and innovation culture, companies must be able to command sufficient profit margins to support it. Recently, downward pressures and risk aversion in the public procurement of engineering services, particularly in civil engineering and infrastructure, have severely reduced the industry's means and opportunity to invest in development and application of new technologies. The Committee needs to address the impact of public procurement policy and of the need to minimise costs and risks upon the industry's ability to finance technical excellence and international competitiveness.

  1.2  The construction industry generally finds difficulty in interacting with responsive mode government funded research as provided to academic institutions. One major problem is that dissemination is not seen as vital by the receiver of funds and will generally be restricted to peer reviewed journals with limited circulation in the commercial sphere. Researchers are not necessarily the best people to disseminate research findings, as a different skill set is needed. Dissemination is a vital aspect of research and should be recognised within separate programmes and budgets which need not be linked to specific research projects.

  1.3  Industrial application will occur only if it the client, consultant or contractor gains an advantage by it; with low margins, individual firms are unable to sustain the cost. The effect of low profit is that investment for the future is often not realistic, which results in an inefficient and uncompetitive industry. Generally disseminated information benefits the public at large as the industry becomes more efficient by adopting government funded developments. Particular examples are the long term work of the former Building Research Establishment (BRE) on behaviour of fills and high alumina cements. On topics such as these it is highly unlikely that an individual contractor would have had the range of opportunity or the persistence to provide the necessary long term funding.

2.  Respective roles of Government Laboratories and independent research technology organisations

  2.1  The major construction research organisations have been privatised in recent years, namely the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), Building Research Establishment (BRE) and HR Wallingford (HR). Other organisations, such as Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), British Cement Association (BCA) and Building Services Research and Information Association (BSRIA) undertake the dissemination of information in the form of publications and commission some research projects within the industry.

  2.2  Commissioned research within such privatised organisations as BRE, TRL and HR is unlikely to come from individual construction companies. These organisations rely on Government funding to underpin their research, ultimately deriving other income from the knowledge gained. It is beneficial for such institutions to undertake regulatory and advisory research on behalf of Government as a client, but they should also undertake long term projects in support of the industry. However industry funding for such projects is not generally available due to the lack of financial resources. Nor are funds available from other sources for such projects.

3.  Operation of Government schemes designed to promote collaboration in industrial application of research

  3.1  In the construction sector three routes are available to promote industry led collaboration in research.

  3.2  The current LINK programmes, Integrated Design and Construction and Meeting Clients' Needs Through Standardisation, provide funds of up to 50 per cent of the total project value.

  3.3  Within the Innovative Manufacturing Initiative (IMI), the Construction as a Manufacturing Process programme provides funding for academic institutions of up to 50 per cent of the project value. This programme has been particularly successful in getting the construction industry to think about the processes in which it is involved and has been influenced by bodies such as the Construction Round Table.

  3.4  The third route is the DETR Partners in Technology programme. Research organisations look to this source for a significant proportion of their funding and compete with proposals from industrial companies on their own or in collaboration with others. Applicants need to contribute 50 per cent of the funding and research organisations generally do not have access to such funding. Industry bodies, suffering from a lack of available finances, also find such contributions onerous. These conditions often thwart research projects of potential benefit to the industry.

  3.5  Industry contributions to such programmes are often in-kind contributions and made by only the very largest companies. Small and medium sized enterprises, whose involvement is a stated aim of the UK Government and European Commission, have even fewer resources to spare and are thus often excluded from participation.

  3.6  Although these programmes have rules which can be daunting to the uninitiated, they provide positive routes to allow companies to pursue new ideas. Construction companies interested in developing new products or processes are generally willing to expend staff time and internal resources towards this end but reluctant to commit expenditure to outside bodies.

4.  Intellectual property rights and patenting

  4.1  The ability to retain intellectual property rights for new developments is generally seen to be important. The emphasis is on retaining a market edge by blocking, with licensing rarely taking place or under consideration. Intellectual property rights considerations can be a source of tension between companies and academic institutions but have been satisfactorily resolved in the managed programmes described above.

  4.2  Intellectual property rights should remain with the author and patent rights should be the property of the patentee.

5.  Provision of finance to support enterprises involved in the application of research and innovation

  5.1  The Partners in Technology programme provides a source of support for the application of research and innovation against relevant case studies. As currently constituted only the LINK programmes, which are limited in scope, allow partial funding for organisations committed to research and innovation. Funding bodies' concerns over incremental research and fear of substitution of funds have resulted in a lack of funding for demonstrator or prototype applications of new technological advances, which are likely to be necessary to persuade a conservative industry to adopt new ideas. If the IMI programme was not restricted to the funding of research academics it could provide a substantial boost to the industry's research and innovation efforts. If the market opportunity arises and the means of application exists there will be no need for each provision. The market will promote applications; what is needed is consistent and secure funding for long term projects with defined objectives.

6.  Role of the Foresight Programme in fostering networks and identifying priorities

  6.1  The first Foresight exercise is generally regarded as flawed in its approach to construction because the industry is so wide-ranging. The statements which emerged from the Delphi exercise were criticised as bland and uninspiring. This aspect is currently being addressed and if the Foresight programme can provide radar warnings to future directions and opportunities for particular sectors of the industry it will be regarded as successful.

7.  Role of the EPSRC in fostering technology transfer

  7.1  Technology transfer is not well established in the construction industry but the use of the Technology Transfer Scheme should be encouraged, especially as more companies engage in managed programmes. The role and applicability of the Faraday Partnerships scheme has had little impact and is not well understood by the construction industry.

  7.2  The White Paper on Science, Engineering and Technology emphasised the need to harness academic research for wealth creation. However the proliferation of schemes to involve industry have different rules and different complexities which create obstacles to companies that may otherwise wish to become involved. Exchanges between industry and academic personnel are desirable, but schemes promoting this approach need to be properly financed to be successful.

  7.3  Managed programmes should be encouraged and expanded but balanced with continuing support for high quality responsive mode research. The additional administrative burden of managed programmes needs to be acknowledged and accepted.

  7.4  EPSRC managed programmes provide a means for sustaining long term programmes of research and centres of excellence, and should be encouraged in this role.

10 March 1998