9 ms·

FWIW, I don't have numbers, but Horizon Europe is both a research funding scheme and an industry innovation funding scheme. https://research-and-innovation.ec.e

by phh 3y ago

FWIW, I don't have numbers, but Horizon Europe is both a research funding scheme and an industry innovation funding scheme. https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding... says "This is 70% of the budget earmarked for SMEs." It has both direct research grants (ERC grants), and funds for big consortium projects, where most of the money goes to big companies, with some money also going to SMEs and researchers (It probably has intermediate funding like direct SME fund, I don't really know the full extent). I wouldn't be surprised that UK joined Horizon Europe because of industry lobbying rather than research.

isaacfrond 3y ago
It's exactly what I'm wondering. The deal seems to stipulate that on average you'd spend about as much as you receive. If so, why not spend the same amount of money on your own scientist? That way you have full control. I don't get what the UK gets out of it. For the EU I can understand, a larger budget means more science done, means more results. Who cares if some of it happens in the UK, since we are getting paid for it anyhow.
- linuskendall 3y ago
  UK researchers can participate in larger Horizon projects if UK is a Horizon members. Much more easy to have joint research projects if the budget can be shared across the project, rather than split up with research outcomes/outputs having to be accounted for across UK/Horizon boundaries. In reality many UK institutions that were part of Horizon projects simply left them or didn't join as partners on applications.
- kramerger 3y ago
  Because research projects are multinational collaborations. How do you get your brightest to stay in UK (or come here from other places) if all your research are isolated to your island??
  - mytailorisrich 3y ago
    They are isolated because that scheme is designed to isolate non-members. But nothing prevents the UK from being part of international collaborations in general.
    - kramerger 3y ago
      No, the scheme is there to simplify collaboration across borders and connect research teams with very different skills. While you can still do it outside the EU programs, it will require a lot of administrative work which most universities cannot handle.
      - mytailorisrich 3y ago
        If being part of the scheme suddenly makes everything possible then I'd say the system is indeed designed to make things difficult for those not part of the scheme... Let's not kid ourselves, this is geopolitics and influence, not just generous cooperation. Edit: Very strange to observe the reactions to my comment... many of you seem have a knee-jerk, black and white, if not naive, reaction to Brexit and the EU. Both sides are playing games and both sides are trying to further their interests, including indeed geopolitical and international influence ones. I am not claiming more than that and not passing judgement on Brexit here.
        RandomLensman 3y ago
        Like an club, things for members are different than for non-members. Having a common and agree set of rules makes it easier for the members and more difficult for non-members. I would take issue with the notion of the EU having any geopolitical capabilities, though.
        mytailorisrich 3y ago
        The EU is a geopolitical entity with geopolitical aims. that has always been the case. You don't disagree with my point re. 'club rules'...
- rsynnott 3y ago
  LOCAL science for LOCAL people. (It's a shame that Gove has largely dropped out of front-line Brexit advocacy; he looked the part).
- jarvist 3y ago
  Why would you want control? That means more bureaucracy you need to do yourself. In the UK (and I believe everywhere with a well functioning research culture), the 'Haldane principle' means that research funding is decided by researchers (not politicians / the civil service). https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmdius/168/16807.htm https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmdi... Funding UK science via the ERC, means you are making use of the network effects for peer review & processes. So the individual funding applications are being reviewed to a higher standard, and better decisions are made about what science to fund.
  - nvm0n2 3y ago
    What the ERC does is controlled by the Commission like everything else in Europe, it's not independent regardless of what it claims. The people making the decisions on what to fund are directly selected by the Commission itself. So the EU's institutional agenda is indivisible from what gets funded via the ERC. That's why they fund stuff like research into disinformation, which the EU defines as more or less anything that goes against its own narratives or agendas, or cultural stereotyping: https://erc.europa.eu/projects-statistics/stories/why-people-share-disinformation https://erc.europa.eu/projects-statistics/stories/why-people... https://www.adinaakbik.eu/projects/2702-eurotypes https://www.adinaakbik.eu/projects/2702-eurotypes Cultural stereotypes are often present in the political and media discourse on European Union (EU) governance: e.g., the lazy Greeks, the tax-dodging Italians, the stingy Dutch, and so forth. Especially when stereotypes are negative, they create conflict between national governments, fuel Euroscepticism among voters, and can lead to the discrimination of citizens or Member States. To address this gap, EUROTYPES sets out to investigate how cultural stereotypes impact cooperation and effectiveness in contemporary EU governance.
kramerger 3y ago
Maybe. This whole brexit thing happened by ignoring researchers and listening to whoever spoke louder :) On the other hand, since brexit happened most international research teams in UK have lost key members to other countries so maybe someone finally took notice.
- FiniteField 3y ago
  >This whole brexit thing happened by ignoring researchers and listening to whoever spoke louder :) When it goes the way someone wants they call that "democracy" ;)
  - swores 3y ago
    Democracy isn't a magical word that automatically makes every decision made democratically good, nor does it stop being democracy if people are lied to and tricked into voting against their own interests.
    - gadders 3y ago
      You could say that about any election, ever. The Brexit Referendum was no more or less honest than any general election.
      - a_humean 3y ago
        Except the leave campaigns lied and/or mislead about the consequnces of leaving or their own intentions for the exit negotiations and post-brexit policies for everything from single market access, fishing rights, to net immigration reductions.
        gadders 3y ago
        Citation needed.
        AlexandrB 3y ago
mytailorisrich 3y ago
The UK government could be funding SMEs directly. The issue, I think, is indeed research institutions, which could also be directly funded, but would still be excluded from most EU programs if not part of the scheme.
- joshvm 3y ago
  The UK does fund SMEs, that's the Innovate UK program. It's a good pot for domestic money and relatively easy to get (or used to be, you'd see the same companies at every conference). It has money for solo industry and industry/university projects. It's under the same umbrella (UKRI) that also funds academic research (STFC, EPSRC, AHRC, etc). For some comprison with Switzerland where I currently live, and who also has a rocky relationship with the EU - we have InnoSuisse which every startup seems to get money from, and SNSF which is the massively oversubscribed science funding agency.
Zenst 3y ago
The UK always wanted to carry on as partnership in many things including the Horizon, alas red-tape of the `brexit` deal saw the whole Ireland border customs handling becoming a sticking point that saw lots of things put on ice. So not a case of the UK joined the Horizon Europe, but was allowed to resubscribe. I do know, that whole mess really upset many scientists, not only UK nationals, but others who saw them cut-off from the collaborations saw pain not only in the UK. Politics is often science's best friend and worst enemy.

by phh 3y ago

isaacfrond 3y ago

It's exactly what I'm wondering. The deal seems to stipulate that on average you'd spend about as much as you receive. If so, why not spend the same amount of money on your own scientist? That way you have full control. I don't get what the UK gets out of it. For the EU I can understand, a larger budget means more science done, means more results. Who cares if some of it happens in the UK, since we are getting paid for it anyhow.

linuskendall 3y ago
UK researchers can participate in larger Horizon projects if UK is a Horizon members. Much more easy to have joint research projects if the budget can be shared across the project, rather than split up with research outcomes/outputs having to be accounted for across UK/Horizon boundaries. In reality many UK institutions that were part of Horizon projects simply left them or didn't join as partners on applications.
kramerger 3y ago
Because research projects are multinational collaborations. How do you get your brightest to stay in UK (or come here from other places) if all your research are isolated to your island??
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  They are isolated because that scheme is designed to isolate non-members. But nothing prevents the UK from being part of international collaborations in general.
  - kramerger 3y ago
    No, the scheme is there to simplify collaboration across borders and connect research teams with very different skills. While you can still do it outside the EU programs, it will require a lot of administrative work which most universities cannot handle.
    - mytailorisrich 3y ago
      If being part of the scheme suddenly makes everything possible then I'd say the system is indeed designed to make things difficult for those not part of the scheme... Let's not kid ourselves, this is geopolitics and influence, not just generous cooperation. Edit: Very strange to observe the reactions to my comment... many of you seem have a knee-jerk, black and white, if not naive, reaction to Brexit and the EU. Both sides are playing games and both sides are trying to further their interests, including indeed geopolitical and international influence ones. I am not claiming more than that and not passing judgement on Brexit here.
      - RandomLensman 3y ago
        Like an club, things for members are different than for non-members. Having a common and agree set of rules makes it easier for the members and more difficult for non-members. I would take issue with the notion of the EU having any geopolitical capabilities, though.
        mytailorisrich 3y ago
        The EU is a geopolitical entity with geopolitical aims. that has always been the case. You don't disagree with my point re. 'club rules'...
rsynnott 3y ago
LOCAL science for LOCAL people. (It's a shame that Gove has largely dropped out of front-line Brexit advocacy; he looked the part).
jarvist 3y ago
Why would you want control? That means more bureaucracy you need to do yourself. In the UK (and I believe everywhere with a well functioning research culture), the 'Haldane principle' means that research funding is decided by researchers (not politicians / the civil service). https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmdius/168/16807.htm https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmdi... Funding UK science via the ERC, means you are making use of the network effects for peer review & processes. So the individual funding applications are being reviewed to a higher standard, and better decisions are made about what science to fund.
- nvm0n2 3y ago
  What the ERC does is controlled by the Commission like everything else in Europe, it's not independent regardless of what it claims. The people making the decisions on what to fund are directly selected by the Commission itself. So the EU's institutional agenda is indivisible from what gets funded via the ERC. That's why they fund stuff like research into disinformation, which the EU defines as more or less anything that goes against its own narratives or agendas, or cultural stereotyping: https://erc.europa.eu/projects-statistics/stories/why-people-share-disinformation https://erc.europa.eu/projects-statistics/stories/why-people... https://www.adinaakbik.eu/projects/2702-eurotypes https://www.adinaakbik.eu/projects/2702-eurotypes Cultural stereotypes are often present in the political and media discourse on European Union (EU) governance: e.g., the lazy Greeks, the tax-dodging Italians, the stingy Dutch, and so forth. Especially when stereotypes are negative, they create conflict between national governments, fuel Euroscepticism among voters, and can lead to the discrimination of citizens or Member States. To address this gap, EUROTYPES sets out to investigate how cultural stereotypes impact cooperation and effectiveness in contemporary EU governance.

kramerger 3y ago

Maybe. This whole brexit thing happened by ignoring researchers and listening to whoever spoke louder :) On the other hand, since brexit happened most international research teams in UK have lost key members to other countries so maybe someone finally took notice.

FiniteField 3y ago
>This whole brexit thing happened by ignoring researchers and listening to whoever spoke louder :) When it goes the way someone wants they call that "democracy" ;)
- swores 3y ago
  Democracy isn't a magical word that automatically makes every decision made democratically good, nor does it stop being democracy if people are lied to and tricked into voting against their own interests.
  - gadders 3y ago
    You could say that about any election, ever. The Brexit Referendum was no more or less honest than any general election.
    - a_humean 3y ago
      Except the leave campaigns lied and/or mislead about the consequnces of leaving or their own intentions for the exit negotiations and post-brexit policies for everything from single market access, fishing rights, to net immigration reductions.
      - gadders 3y ago
        Citation needed.
        AlexandrB 3y ago

mytailorisrich 3y ago

The UK government could be funding SMEs directly. The issue, I think, is indeed research institutions, which could also be directly funded, but would still be excluded from most EU programs if not part of the scheme.

joshvm 3y ago
The UK does fund SMEs, that's the Innovate UK program. It's a good pot for domestic money and relatively easy to get (or used to be, you'd see the same companies at every conference). It has money for solo industry and industry/university projects. It's under the same umbrella (UKRI) that also funds academic research (STFC, EPSRC, AHRC, etc). For some comprison with Switzerland where I currently live, and who also has a rocky relationship with the EU - we have InnoSuisse which every startup seems to get money from, and SNSF which is the massively oversubscribed science funding agency.

Zenst 3y ago

The UK always wanted to carry on as partnership in many things including the Horizon, alas red-tape of the `brexit` deal saw the whole Ireland border customs handling becoming a sticking point that saw lots of things put on ice. So not a case of the UK joined the Horizon Europe, but was allowed to resubscribe. I do know, that whole mess really upset many scientists, not only UK nationals, but others who saw them cut-off from the collaborations saw pain not only in the UK. Politics is often science's best friend and worst enemy.