On the face of it, Scotland benefits greatly from being part of a UK-wide system for funding scientific research.
In 2012-13, Scottish universities secured £257 million in grant funding from UK research councils, around 13.1% of the cash on offer, although Scotland has 8.4% of the population.
Scottish higher education institutions punch above their weight, with five universities ranked among the 200 best in the world and research scoring highly in terms of citations.
The question is whether and how that situation might continue after the independence referendum. Despite claims that it is unusual or even rare for government-backed funding agencies to pledge research money outwith their own borders, there is no guarantee the relative funding success of Scottish higher education institutions would continue if they remain within the UK.
With further austerity measures and cuts to come from the Coalition Government, the prospects are arguably concerning. Meanwhile, just because Scottish universities are successful in winning funding now does not mean they always will be.
But the question of the future of higher education in the event of a Yes vote is a valid one. Some leading academics feel Scotland would lose out, with the rest of the UK unlikely to fund research north of the Border, while any future Scottish funding council would be unable to afford to fund "big science" work on a larger scale. Others argue an independent Scotland could flourish economically by taking better advantage of its strong research base. International collaboration is increasingly common and there is no reason to think Scotland would suddenly be shut out of such arrangements, they claim.
It might be expected that UK funders would still choose to fund the best research prospects, regardless of geography. The Scottish Government's position (that it will negotiate a continuation of cross-border funding) is tacitly supported by the UK's research councils which support continuing a strong shared research system.
This is another area where much would depend on such negotiations after a Yes vote. Pro-Union academics also warn UK charities might pull out of Scotland, leading to a major loss of income. But is this true? Would medical research charities not continue to fund the very best research available, regardless of where it is carried out?
It should be possible for Scottish universities to make the case for much of their funding on the basis that any breakthroughs are likely to have benefits beyond Scottish borders. The outcome of the negotiations which would follow independence is not predictable or guaranteed. But the status quo does not guarantee protection for Scottish universities either. As has been the case with much of the independence debate, the degree of certainty expressed by both sides is of limited value.
It would be refreshing to see positive proposals for strengthening Scottish research, and its commercialisation, from both sides, rather than scare-mongering and dogma that cannot readily be proved or disproved.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article