A leading industry recruiter has warned that the UK's move to rejoin the EU's flagship funding programme for research and innovation could have a dampening impact on Scotland's scientific sector.
Ivor Campbell, chief executive of Stirlingshire-based life sciences search company Snedden Campbell, said the return to the €95 billion (£82.9bn) Horizon Europe project may discourage entrepreneurialism if most of the funding goes to large research establishments south of the border. At the same time, a reliance on large-scale international research may lead to complacency regarding domestic research and development efforts.
“Like the Erasmus program, Horizon Europe has been criticised for potentially benefiting a select group of elite individuals and institutions, while the broader population bears the costs," Mr Campbell said. "The UK should ensure that the programme's benefits are spread more equitably.
“The UK must carefully evaluate the long-term impact, allocation of funds, and alignment with national priorities to ensure that this move genuinely benefits its scientific community and the broader society.”
After seven years of uncertainty since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced in September that the UK will join Horizon Europe in January 2024. The UK will also become part of Copernicus, the EU's earth observation program.
As part of the deal, Britain will contribute €2.6bn a year to the programme in exchange for the opportunity to access grants and participate in international collaborations. Under the "bespoke new agreement", the UK will be able to recoup funding if British scientists receive significantly less money than the UK's annual contribution.
READ MORE: Scottish Government urged to boost research funding to universities
“Rejoining the program solely for the sake of being part of a prominent international collaboration may not be sufficient if the outcomes are not commensurate with the investment," Mr Campbell said.
“The substantial financial commitment to Horizon Europe should be weighed against other national priorities. The UK must consider whether investing billions of euros in the programme is more beneficial than directing those funds towards infrastructure, healthcare, or education.”
The arrangement also precludes the UK from rejoining the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), the single market for the trade in nuclear materials and technology across the region.
Mr Campbell said opting for the UK's own £650 million domestic alternative to Euratom raises concerns about nuclear safety, research, the supply of medical isotopes, and the UK's standing in international non-proliferation efforts.
“Euratom plays a crucial role in overseeing the transport, storage, and use of fissile and radioactive materials, ensuring safety and security standards," he said. "Losing access to these safeguards could potentially compromise nuclear safety in the UK.
READ MORE: What is Horizon Europe and why has the UK rejoined?
“Euratom is essential for the development of nuclear power, which is crucial for achieving carbon-free energy targets, especially as much of the UK's nuclear industry is owned by overseas firms.
“It is vital for nuclear science and research, including the operation of facilities like the Joint European Torus at Culham, which conducts fusion research."
He added: “The exclusion from Euratom jeopardises the UK's participation in these critical scientific endeavours. Furthermore, Euratom is responsible for the supply of medical isotopes used in the treatment of various diseases, including cancer and cardiovascular conditions. The disruption of the supply chain for these critical medical materials could have serious consequences for patients' well-being.”
Established in 2001, Snedden Campbell recruits senior executives and research scientists from all over the world for UK medical technology, pharmaceutical and biotech companies. The business is owned by Mr Campbell and his wife, Jennifer Snedden.
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 here