4. The OST is not a Government department in its own right and thus has no headline Public Service Agreements (PSAs), but one of the DTI's 2002 PSA targets (number 2) clearly relates to the OST:[3] It is to:

"Improve the relative international performance of the UK's science and engineering base, the exploitation of the Science Base, and the overall innovation performance of the UK economy."

5. This succeeds Objective II from 2000, which is "to make the most of the UK's science, engineering and technology". It contained two, more detailed targets:[4]

• PSA Target 5: Improve the overall international ranking of the UK's Science and Engineering Base, as measured by international measures of quality, cost-effectiveness and relevance.
• PSA Target 6: Increase the level of exploitation of technological knowledge derived from the science and engineering base, as demonstrated by a significant rise in the proportion of innovating businesses citing such sources.

6. The Science Budget for 2003-04 to 2005-06 contains an additional set of objectives, divided into "four key areas where the results of investment from the Science Budget deliver output directly relevant to this wider government strategy for science and innovation".[5] These, along with the OST's operational objectives are shown in Table 1. These objectives for the Science Base are very useful and provide a focus for our scrutiny. Many of them will be addressed in this Report.

Table 1: Objectives for the Office of Science and Technology for 2003-04 to 2005-06.[6]

Key area	Objective
Research	RO1:To continue to improve the excellence, relevance and impact of the knowledge created from Research Council-funded programmes. RO2:To increase research capability and international competitiveness of the UK in new strategic areas. RO3:To increase the dynamism and flexibility of Research Council programmes to respond to changing requirements and opportunities, and to support effectively multi-disciplinary research, new researchers and higher risk research proposals. RO4:To maintain access for scientists working in the UK to the necessary major facilities, databases and supporting laboratory infrastructure that will enable them to deliver world-class research.
Training	TO1:To raise the standard of postgraduate and postdoctoral researchers, and increase their numbers in priority fields experiencing shortfalls or recruitment difficulties. TO2:To enhance their training to better fit them for careers requiring research skills and experience and increase their attractiveness to future employers.
Knowledge transfer	KTO1:To increase the performance of the science and engineering base in exploiting the results of its research. KTO2:To increase the effectiveness of knowledge transfer from Research Council institutes in line with the recommendations of the Baker review of public sector research establishments and the NAO Report on commercialisation of public sector science.
Science in Society	SSO1:To enhance public awareness of the outcomes from and priorities for publicly funded science and increase openness over its management and use through greater engagement and dialogue with the public. SSO2:To increase the reach and impact of activities undertaken by the Research Councils and other bodies funded through the Science Budget by improving joint working between them and other organisations.
Operational	OO1.To complete work on implementation of the recommendations of the 2001 Quinquennial Reviews. OO2.To meet the Government's requirements and targets concerning freedom of information, e-business,(including electronic records management), the modernisation of public services and the promotion of racial and gender equality of opportunity. OO3.To have established the systems to support a co-ordinated performance management system for the Science Budget and the Research Councils in time for the next spending review.

Source: Department of Trade and Industry, Science Budget 2003-04 to 2005-06, December 2002

Science Base metrics

7. The Annual Performance Report for 2003 describes the Department's performance against PSA target 2 as being "on course" and states that "it will take some years before the significant increase in the Science Budget begins to be reflected in a change in the UK's performance".[7]

8. The DTI's Annual Performance Report for 2002 announced that it had commissioned consultants Evidence Ltd to develop metrics for the Science Base and its ranking in the international community. These were intended to replace the "very narrow set of very high-level indicators which gave no information about the detail and dynamism within the Research Base".[8]

9. The Report from Evidence Ltd was published in October 2003.[9] It divided its work into seven themes and its principal findings are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Performance of the UK Science Base.

Theme	Conclusions
Inputs (including expenditure on research)	The UK is spending less on research as a proportion of GDP (1.8%) than its competitors. It is sixth in the G8.
Outputs (including people and publications)	The UK, with Japan, is second to the US in its share of PhD awards. It has slipped to third in its share of global publications.
Outcomes (research recognition, citations, training and research quality)	The UK gets 11% of global citations behind the US but Germany is closing. It has second place in 8 of the 9 subjects areas. It is third in maths.
Productivity - financial (outcomes and outputs relative to inputs)	The UK is highly productive in terms of PhDs and citations.
Productivity - labour	Second in PhDs awarded per researcher in the G8 and leads in publications and citations per researcher.
People	The UK is weak in the availability of skilled people with research training.
Business expenditure	The UK leads the G8 in business investment in higher education.

Source: Department of Trade and Industry, PSA target metrics for the UK Research Base, October 2003

10. The data are consistent with the widely touted claim that the UK has a strong and internationally competitive Science Base. But far from being "on course" to improve the relative international performance of the science and engineering base, the UK is slipping back in its share of global publications. It is also clear that the UK has a productive cohort of researchers and the Government cannot expect to reverse this trend through improvements in productivity.[10] Increases in the Science Budget in recent years have been less than those in the OST's comparator group and overall Government expenditure on R&D has declined as a proportion of GDP. According to the Forward Look 2003, expenditure in cash terms on R&D by civil Government Departments (excluding Funding Councils and Research Councils), will be £1,636 million in 2004-05, only £40 million higher than the figure for 2001-02 and representing a 2.4% increase over three years.[11] The Evidence Report also draws attention to the weakness of the UK in the availability of skilled people with research training.[12] This is likely to have an adverse impact on the future performance of the Science Base unless it is corrected.

11. The OST says this analysis of the Research Base will be repeated annually and the results will be used as a basis on which to monitor any changes in the relative international performance of the Science Base.[13] While we suspect that a biannual study would be sufficient, the data are interesting and provide a good opportunity to develop useful Government targets. It is surprising, therefore, that the DTI considers that they are "too wide ranging to judge our performance in 'improving the relative international performance of the Science and Engineering Base'".[14] We understand that the DTI is now in the process of agreeing with HM Treasury a small basket of measures against which to measure performance against PSA target 2 and it is expected that this will include "measures covering aspects of scientific excellence, production of trained people and productivity". It seems that the DTI is moving back towards the high level measures it considered were inadequate in 2002. This would be a mistake. We shall await with interest the publication of these measures when they appear "in due course".

12. We commend the Office of Science and Technology for commissioning research into metrics for the Science and Engineering Base. This will have been of no use if weaknesses identified by the work are not remedied, however. In particular, the Government must heed the warning that, despite increased investment through the Science Budget, UK Government funding for R&D is in decline relative to its international competitors and that UK's share of global publications is slipping. Having developed better measures, the OST should stick with them so that performance over time can be measured.

13. The Evidence Ltd Report has also identified a few disciplines that "despite remaining strong internationally, are not matching the relative performance levels shown by the rest of the UK disciplines".[15] These are mathematics, physical sciences and engineering, and the social sciences.[16] The Government says that it will be addressing any reasons for these relative weaknesses in SR 2004.[17]

14. These data collected by Evidence Ltd complement the specific reviews of certain disciplines undertaken by the Research Councils, although we have concerns about the piecemeal approach and prefer the comprehensive rolling programme of reviews commissioned by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council.[18] We urge the OST to encourage all Research Councils to conduct a rolling programme of international reviews of disciplines within their remits to ensure that the UK retains strength in all research areas.

4   HM Treasury, 2000 Spending Review: Public Service Agreements July 2000, Cm 4808 Back

5   Department of Trade and Industry, Science Budget 2003-04 to 2005-06, December 2002, p 9 Back

6   Department of Trade and Industry, Science Budget 2003-04 to 2005-06, December 2002 Back

7   Department of Trade and Industry, Autumn Performance Report 2003, Cm 6067, para 3.4 Back

8   Ev 12 Back

9   Department of Trade and Industry, PSA target metrics for the UK Research Base, a report prepared by Evidence Ltd, October 2003 Back

10   As above p 6 Back

11   Department of Trade and Industry, Forward Look 2003: Government-funded science, engineering & technology, Cm 5877, July 2003 Back

12   Department of Trade and Industry, PSA target metrics for the UK Research Base, a report prepared by Evidence Ltd, October 2003, p 6 Back

13   Ev 12 Back

14   Ev 18 Back

15   Ev 12 Back

16   Department of Trade and Industry, PSA target metrics for the UK Research Base, a report prepared by Evidence Ltd, October 2003, p 7, indicator 3.02 Back

17   Ev 18 Back

18   Unpublished memorandum submitted by Research Councils UK Back