86/609/EEC amendments continue

The European Parliament has rejected calls for changes in legislation that would have severely restricted the use of animals in research. It was feared that amendments to the directive (which were proposed in 2001) would limit animal research and increase related bureaucracy. Yesterday (May 6th) a large majority of the European Parliament voted in favor of the committee's recommendation and the report now moves to the Council of Ministers.

Despite broad approval from the science community, some aspects of the directive could still cause problems such as continued protection for the tiny juvenile forms of cephalopods and the push for compulsory data sharing on all projects. Final decisions on the amendments to the animal-research directive may not be made for up to 2 years.

Read the ScienceInsider article in full.

Talking about stem cells

Sciencewise has published an evaluation of the UK Stem Cell Initiative (UKSCI). The project involved 50 interviews with stakeholders and three deliberative workshops with 200 members of the public at various regional locations. The project aimed to inform research council decisions related to stem cells in addition to providing guidance on future public engagement on this issue.

Read the evaluation in full.

Job Opportunity: Chief Executive Society of Biology

The Biosciences Federation (BSF) and the Institute of Biology (IoB) are uniting to form the Society of Biology. This new Society, which will be fully operational in the second half of 2009, will provide a single unified voice for all the biosciences and act on behalf of all those who care about the future of biology whether they be teachers, scientists, leaders of organisations or interested non-scientists.

The Interim Council of the Society of Biology now seeks to recruit the first Chief Executive for the new organisation. This is a unique and exciting opportunity to lead and shape an organisation that must quickly deliver the key aims of:

• representing all who are committed to the practise of biology in academia and industry, and to biological education and research,
• facilitating the promotion and translation of advances in biological science for national and international benefit, and
• helping the wider public to engage with the subject.

The successful candidate will have demonstrated that he/she can lead and manage an organisation with drive and success. He/she will be expected to share the vision for the future of the Society developed by the Interim Council and have the ability to deliver it effectively.

Read the job advert in full.

Workings of IUSS select committee come under scrutiny

The broad remit and dwindling membership of the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills (IUSS) committee has been raised as a cause for concern. Set up in 2007, there were originally 14 MPs responsible for monitoring the government department with a budget of £17.5 billion.

The THES reports that recently the number of MPs who attend has dropped to nine ‘making it one of the smallest select committees and, on average, just six MPs attend each committee session’.

Brian Iddon, Labour MP for Bolton South East and member of the IUSS committee suggested that ‘the committee‘s remit was too broad, covering science as well as higher and further education.’ However it vital that the committee functions properly, he added ‘the select committees are the only way now we can scrutinise the executive in detail’.

Read the THES article in full

Research Councils to look again at open access

An independent study will cause research councils to review their current policies regarding open access after they admitted their current position was having ‘limited impact’.

Up until this point councils had been unprepared to require all council-funded researchers to use openly available repositories to deposit their work. Instead individual councils had created their own positions on the matter. However, the survey undertaken by SQW Consulting had found that open access is proving more and more popular with UK researchers. In a statement the councils said: ‘(we) have agreed that over time (we) will support increased open access by building on mandates on grant-holders to deposit research papers in suitable repositories within an agreed time period, and extending support for publishing in open-access journals, including through the pay-to-publish model’.

Read the THES article in full

2009 Budget - reallocation of funding a cause for concern

In the wake of the 2009 budget, academics are preparing themselves for a slash in funding after the government ordered for a redistribution of finances.

Research Councils are to manage £106 million in savings from the science budget in order for these to be reallocated to ‘support key areas of economic potential’. In the current economic climate John Denham, the Universities Secretary, said the budget was ‘a good settlement'.

So far no detailed information has been provided as to which programmes may be affected and councils have not been given specific targets. Research Councils UK told the Times Higher Education that the ‘bulk’ of the money would be found by reprioritising research funding. There would most likely be a reliance on co-funding research with the private sector alongside administrative cuts.

Read the THES article in full

Introducing the newly formed Office for the Life Sciences

The Office for the Life Sciences (OLS) will work with industry to make further improvements in the operating environment for the pharmaceutical, medical biotechnology, and healthcare technology industries in the UK, culminating in the publication of a Life Sciences Industrial Strategy this summer.

The OLS has said that it is, 'pleased with a set of measures put forward in last week's Budget which will have a positive influence on the operating environment for life sciences companies and which recognise the importance of supporting the life sciences industry as a key strategic sector of the future' in a DIUS announcement.

The announcement goes on to quote Lord Drayson, who leads the work of the OLS who says, "It is an important achievement for the newly formed Office for Life Sciences that the Budget included a commitment to explore the tax treatment of Intellectual property to enhance the competitiveness of the UK."

Read the DIUS announcement in full.

Women in Science Conference

European conference: Changing research landscapes to make the most of human potential –10 years of activities in women and science, and BEYOND

14-15 May 2009, Prague

The conference will focus on how gender management enters into the modernisation process that is currently being carried out at universities and research institutions in many countries. Modernisation is generally focused on some critical issues such as: autonomy, funding, accountability, partnership with businesses, quality of research, intellectual property rights,open access to research results, contribution to innovation, community engagement, etc. Human resources, however, are often not included as one of the main issues – and gender issues are rarely considered. However, no true modernisation of universities and research institutions can take place if the social relationships governing these remain based on and ruled by stereotypes – i.e. if excellence is biased or if innovative-ness is not promoted through diverse thinking.

Gender-bias is often the source of the more-ingrained stereotypes: tackling it in the management of universities and research institutions could provide the basis for radical change in other fields."

Via European Platform of Women Scientists.
Find out more about the conference.

Hopes of £1 billion funding increase quashed

After weeks of hope that the UK scientific sector would see a funding boost, similar to that seen in the US, Darling's budget has come as a huge disappointment. The new budget does not contain any new money for places or research, although an existing commitment to ring-fence the science budget remains, an article in THES reports.

In a £400 million savings package, universities will be required to compete for grants. 'The £400 million in efficiency savings in further and higher education is expected to be found through the "use of benchmarking data, greater contestability, particularly in commissioning new programmes and services; reduced expenditure through lower than expected rates of inflation and the strategic reprioritisation and rephasing of programmes".'

Read the THES article in full.

UK’s leading biology organisations agree to unification

Members of the UK’s two leading biology organisations, the Institute of Biology (IoB) and the Biosciences Federation (BSF), have voted overwhelmingly in favour of unification to form a single organisation, the Society of Biology. This positive development takes the IoB and BSF a step closer to the creation of an organisation that combines the expertise of the learned societies and other biology organisations with the professional skills of the IoB and its individual members. The Biochemical Society is a member of the Biosciences Federation.

Read the press release in full.

Biochemical Society Receives £113,317 from Monsanto Fund

The Biochemical Society today announced it has received £113,317 from the Monsanto Fund, a private foundation and the philanthropic arm of the Monsanto Company, to continue funding the production of new resources for secondary school science.

The Society's education team have drawn on their extensive links with leading scientists and teachers in the development of these “SciberBrain” resources. The website http://www.sciberbrain.org/ will feature free activities, games and animated slideshows that can be used online or in the classroom to inspire young people about developments in modern bioscience. Topics such as stem cell research, vaccinations and genetically modified organisms will be explored.

SCORE welcomes science diploma delay

The Science Community Partnership Representing Education (SCORE) has welcomed the decision to delay the introduction of the Science Diploma at Level 3.

Sir Alan Wilson, the Chair of SCORE is quoted as saying, "The decision to delay for a year the launch of the Science Diploma at Level 3 is one that we have been pressing for over a considerable period of time and we are delighted to see Government recognise the need for further work. This additional development time can now be used to address a number of key issues to ensure that the Science Diploma becomes a successful qualification."

Issues which SCORE hopes to address include:

• How teaching, learning and assessment within the Science Diploma can be focussed towards applied sciences
• The development of customised qualifications to supplement to the principal learning of the diploma to prepare students for opportunities in the sciences within both Higher Education and employment
  

Read the Royal Society press release in full.
Visit the SCORE website.

HUBS 2009

The Heads of University Bioscience Departments (HUBS) group has announced the programme for the Spring 2009 meeting which will take place between 4-5 May at Weetwood Hall, Leeds. The meetings will address the topic, 'Challenges to Maintaining Standards' and sessions will be held on, 'Key Scientific Skills', 'Practical Work and Final Year Projects' and 'Assessment and Feedback, Roles of External Examiners and Maintaining Academic Excellence'.

View the full meeting programme and register online.

Call for additional £2bn in funding

The National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (Nesta) and a group of research-based universities led by Sir Roy Anderson, rector of Imperial College London are calling for as much as £2bn in additional funding in the budget, reports the Financial Times.

It is envisioned that the money would be spent through two streams, the first would be allocated to the seven research councils to support research and postgraduate training. The second 'would be used to help finance small high-tech companies and start ups' which are suffering from a long-term shortage of early-stage venture capital funding.

David Delpy, chief executive of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council is quoted as saying, "The big risk now is that, with the US planning to invest $18bn in research grants and $3.5bn in scientific infrastructure, we could lose what we have built up over the past decade."

Read the Financial Times article in full.

Royal Society launches inquiry: 'Fruits of Curiosity'

The Royal Society has launched an 11 month enquiry, 'The Fruits of Curiosity: science, innovation and future sources of wealth', which will examine the role that science will play in equipping Britain to meet the economic, social and environmental challenges of the next fifty years. The enquiry will look beyond the current 10-Year Investment Framework.

Vice President of the Royal Society, Sir Martin Taylor, will lead the inquiry and at the launch said, "We have to seize this opportunity to reshape our economy, based on science and innovation... Our study will lay the foundations for a new approach to science, innovation and the creation of wealth. We are particularly keen to explore how policies for science and innovation can be better aligned with the transition to a low-carbon economy."

Read the Royal Society press release in full.

Biochemical Society President to become Chair of BBSRC Council?

Biochemical Society President Professor Sir Tom Blundell FRS, currently Sir William Dunn Professor and Head of School of Biological Sciences at Cambridge University, has been selected as the preferred candidate to become Chair of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC).

Yesterday (Monday 6 April), Innovation Universities and Skills Secretary, John Denham invited the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Select Committee to hold pre-appointment hearings and to report on Professor Blundell’s and Dr Gillespie’s suitability for these posts. This in line with proposals announced last year to increase democratic scrutiny of key public appointments.

Read the DIUS announcement in full.

Is Labour undermining Haldane principle?

Adam Afriyie, the Shadow Science Minister, ahead of a speech to science leaders at the Royal Society said 'the Government should stop pretending that the Haldane principle "stood affected" as ministers tried to use science to drive the economy', reports THES.

Mr Afriyie is quoted as saying, "It is... right that the Government sets the overall strategic priorities... but I am concerned that it may be nudging or picking particular projects within that".

The Haldane principle in British research policy is the idea that decisions about what to spend research funds on should be made by researchers rather than politicians.

Read the THES article in full.

Scottish universities face funding cuts

In the wake of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), 'nearly a third of Scotland's universities will see their total funding cut in real terms for 2009-10' reports the THES.

In comparison with England which saw a 4 per cent cash increase and a 2 per cent real-terms rise when inflation was included, in Scotland, total funding increased 3.4 per cent in cash terms, equating to 1.4 per cent including inflation. This news comes after the Scottish Funding Council announced how the £1.14 billion allocated by the Scottish Government would be spread across 20 universities in 2009-10.

Stirling and Strathclyde have seen the biggest decrease in funding with falls of 1.6 per cent and 0.3 per cent respectively. This is 'despite receiving special moderation funding funding of £1.5 million and £1.3 million to soften the cuts' reports THES. The University of Dundee, Queen Margaret University and Glasgow Caledonian University have all seen below-inflation rises.

Within these allocation to Universities, some science areas fared better than others: Community-based medicine rose 102 per cent, physical sciences rose 31.5 per cent, hospital and laboratory medicine rose 30 per cent, while funding for biological sciences fell 19 per cent.

Read the THES article in full.

China attempts to crack down on scientific fraud

SciDev reports that in an attempt to combat scientific misconduct, the Chinese Ministry of Education has 'stipulated seven acts of academic misconduct and how they will be punished.' The circular states that plagiarism, falsifying data and references, fabricating CVs and changing others' academic achievements or signing their names without permission are scientific misconduct.

The new measures are aimed at higher education institutions after a recent scandal saw an associate professor and dean of pharmaceutical science lose their jobs over allegations of copying data. Higher education institutions are consequentially also under pressure to train teachers and students in good academic conduct.

Hou Xinyi (Nankai University) is quoted as saying that 'it is the government-controlled grant and award system that has spawned misconduct among Chinese academia', with this system making it easier for those in higher positions to win funding leaving researchers under pressure to gain contacts in addition to publishing in as many high impact journals as possible.

Read the SciDev article in full.

EPSRC considers blacklisting measures

The Guardian reports that the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) has 'announced plans to "blacklist" academic researchers who submit three unsuccessful research proposals in any one year and have a low personal success rate of winning grants'. The EPSRC has said the proposal will help to manage demand for grants. David Reid, EPSRC's head of communications is quoted as saying, "A small number of people put a disproportionate burden on the peer-review system. We're talking about weeding out consistently low-quality proposals."

However, the announcements have caused fear and anger in the chemistry community, with concern about the impact of such measures on scientist's careers and potential department closures as a result.

In a letter to the Guardian, Professor Joe Sweeney (University of Reading) states: 'This policy will not increase the number of scientific projects funded: only the success rate will improve. Thus, then it presents the ludicrous possibility that the distribution of public funding for science will now be judged not by quality, but by the amount of money, in a self-destructive negative-feedback loop: the less money available, the less success, and the higher the body count of blacklisted scientists.'

A petition against the policy has been set up on the Number 10 website.

Read the Guardian letter in full.
Read Professor Joe Sweeney's letter in full.
Sign/view the online petition.