1.  SUMMARY

  1.1  Science centres contribute significantly to government objectives in supporting the work of science teachers and enriching the learning experiences of their pupils. Among young people they raise an awareness of science-based careers; for adults they provide an appreciation of the work of scientists and opportunities for democratic consultation and debate.

  1.2  Capital sums totalling in excess of £500 million were invested in buildings for science centres during the years around the turn of the millennium.

  1.3  A capital expenditure of this order carries an inevitable revenue consequence which is far in excess of the possible earnings from admission charges.

  1.4  Science centres have been resourceful and energetic in creating income streams other than those provided by educational and tourism-related outputs.

  1.5  Funding from government, commercial and charitable sources in England has been almost exclusively linked to the delivery of specific projects, or to minor capital improvements.

  1.6  The time expended in chasing such funding, which makes only a slight contribution to overall sustainability, has been debilitating for the centres and sometimes distracting from their central mission.

  1.7  Better arrangements for the support of science centres have been achieved by the devolved administrations, notably in Wales (annual revenue support for Techniquest) and Scotland (annual funding programme for developmental programmes).

  1.8  I recommend evaluation of the procedures adopted by the devolved administrations, with a view to reviewing the approach adopted in England. A first step will be to determine a "home department" for the science centres, recognising that their core business is educational.

2.  PERSONAL INTRODUCTION

  Colin Johnson OBE is a trustee of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Vice-President with special reference to the Young People's Programme. From 1997-2004, he was the Chief Executive of Techniquest, the UK's first purpose-built science discovery centre, having been involved with the project from its inception in 1986. He was the founding Chair of ECSITE-UK, the national science and discovery centre network, and has served the sector internationally in a number of capacities—notably as a board member of ECSITE (the European Collaborative for Science Industry and Technology Exhibitions) and of ASTC (the US-based Association for Science-Technology Centers),for whom he also co-chaired the International Committee. In retirement he is a part-time consultant on informal science education, with clients in both the UK and overseas.

  His earlier background is in the formal education sector. A chemist by training, he was for 12 years a science teacher, and for a further 12 years he was a university lecturer in science education, with responsibility for the pre-service and in-service training of chemistry teachers. During this period he led a number of curriculum developments and published a widely adopted textbook for school chemistry.

3.  FACTUAL INFORMATION

3.1  The "Millennium investment" in Science Centres

  Large capital sums were invested in 17 science "attractions" (museums, science centres, botanic gardens, aquaria) in association with the millennium celebrations.

  Total costs (including directly related infrastructure): £1,000 million of which the principal contributions were ...

3.2  Ecsite-UK

  Ecsite-UK, the national science and discovery centre network, was established in 2001 with support in cash and in kind from the Wellcome Trust.

  It currently has 75 member institutions:

3.3  Attendance

  Annual attendance at Ecsite-UK member institutions exceeds 10 million. Of this total, about 5.5 million are paid-for visits to institutions outside London. Approx. 1.5 million of these visits are undertaken by organised groups from schools and other educational bodies.

4.  A CONTEXT FOR SCIENCE CENTRES

4.1  The nature of the science centre business

  4.1.1  Science centres are not commercial ventures. Their principal mission is educational, and the costs of providing educational outputs are subsidised by their "leisure and tourism" business, together with other income streams which vary from one institution to another. In 20 years, no commercial operator has chosen to move into the science centre business.

  4.1.2  Admission charges typically contribute 30-50% of the annual revenue of science centres. The corresponding figure for the publicly funded National Museums (before "free entry" was introduced) was 5-15%.

  4.1.3  Most UK science centres do not receive core funding from national or regional governments, or from endowments.

  4.1.4  The scale of the capital investments in the "Millennium centres" has saddled some science centres with enormous revenue consequences—as was always predicted. Late in 1995 and early in 1996, meetings were held in London and Cardiff between the Chief Executive of the Millennium Commission and senior representatives of Techniquest in order to discuss the Commission's plan to invest in new science centres. A very clear warning was given about the revenue implications of large capital investments.

  4.1.5  "Ambulance-chasing" for project funding is a debilitating way for science centres to balance their finances ... and clouds the mission and identity of the sector.

4.2  What do science centres do well?

  Science centres contribute significantly to government objectives in supporting the work of science teachers and enriching the learning experiences of their pupils. Among young people they raise an awareness of science-based careers; for adults they provide an appreciation of the work of scientists and opportunities for democratic consultation and debate. In particular, they ...

  4.2.1  create lively, engaging and high-quality informal learning environments for families and school pupils;

  4.2.2  support the work of teachers and enrich the learning of pupils in relation to the national curriculum in science, and encouraging creativity and innovation;

  4.2.3  collaborate effectively with one another on projects and professional development;

  4.2.4  serve a large audience (5m paying visitors per year, another 5 million free admission visitors—mostly in London); and

  4.2.5  attract large numbers of family groups, especially "middle class".

4.3  What would a more stable funding base allow science centres to do better?

  With a more stable funding base, the science centres would ...

  4.3.1  further develop their core educational business, and offer it at free or reduced rates to a wider range of schools;

  4.3.2  increasingly diversify and extend their audiences (communities as well as leisure visitors, teenagers as well as children, adults without children);

  4.3.3  become more clearly identified with science than with leisure (while retaining their ability to draw visitors as a leisure attraction);

  4.3.4  provide a more effective forum for scientists to engage with the public, to acta as role models, and to extend their work on "democratising science" through the resource-intensive activities the centres have pioneered, such as upstream consultation, discussion and debate; and

  4.3.5  achieve better focus on their non-commercial objectives, and thereby better visibility as a genre.

5.  WHAT HAPPENS ELSEWHERE IN THE UK?

  5.1  Wales: The "Techniquest group" of centres receives annual revenue funding from the National Assembly for Wales, against agreed criteria and performance review.

  5.2  Scotland: The Scottish Executive has introduced a number of funding measures for the national group of 5 science centres, with elements of both capital refurbishment and revenue support.

  5.3  Northern Ireland: The Department of Culture, Arts & Libraries provides "deficit funding" for the W5 science centre (not, in my view, a satisfactory arrangement—but one which has recognised the operating environment in which science centres work).

6.  RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1  Choice of "home" department

  During my period as Chair of Ecsite-UK there was a clear "pass the parcel" attitude between the DfES, the DCMS and the OST (as then known) as to which Department should have responsibility for science centres.

  The mission of science centres is primarily educational, and the choice of a "home department" should recognise this.

6.2  Revenue funding requirement

  To date, the financial instability of the English science centres has been addressed only through short-term palliatives. The modest funding initiatives to stimulate project activity, and to support capital reinvestment (notably the ReDiscover programme of the Millennium Commission, the Wellcome Trust and the Wolfson Foundation) have been gratefully appreciated by the sector.

  However, the central issue of sustainability has not been recognised through the provision of revenue support. An evaluation of current arrangements in Wales and Scotland would enable an informed decision to be made about future policy for science centre funding in England.

June 2007