HORIZON: AN UNGAINLY EXIT

Science HORIZON: AN UNGAINLY EXIT Kath MacKay Contributor Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own. Director of Life Sciences for Bruntwood SciTech Following New! Follow this author to stay notified about their latest stories. Got it! Sep 5, 2022, 10:23am EDT | New! Click on the conversation bubble to join the conversation Got it! Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Share to Linkedin This summer marked the return of the Commonwealth Games to the UK for the first time since 2014.

A huge amount has changed in the UK’s international outlook since then but the thread of community that runs through the Games has not. As a corporate partner of this year’s event in Birmingham, it was a pleasure to see the UK not only leading in the sporting sense but also acting as a facilitator on the international stage. More relevant to my day job, it was during the Games that the cross-party House of Lords science and technology committee published its report criticising the UK’s lack of a cohesive plan to help it become the ‘science superpower’ it aims to be by 2030.

At the centre of the review was the ongoing dispute relating to the exclusion of UK scientists from the EU research and innovation programme, Horizon Europe. In my view, and that of many of my peers, our future relationship with the £80bn R&D programme – and the collaborative network of European research institutes it represents – will have a significant bearing on the future of the life sciences sector here in the UK. The UK’s relationship with the Horizon Europe programme will have significant impact on the future .

. . [+] of the life science sector.

AFP via Getty Images In the event that Liz Truss is unable to bring an end to the impasse regarding British access to Horizon – which has become a political football over the Northern Ireland protocol – we risk being all the poorer not for the loss of funding but the loss of fellowship. As we saw from the Games, true ‘superpowers’ don’t act in isolation. Westminster has committed £17bn in funding to the programme before 2027, which the new administration has already earmarked for a separate domestic vehicle.

In support of the local model would be a senior minister for science, technology and innovation, and new planning rules to make it easier to build life sciences facilities – developments we would unsurprisingly endorse. Channeled correctly, these interventions will have a positive impact on innovative UK businesses. What do you think? One Community, Many Voices.

Be the first to comment comments posted on Forbes. Add your voice now. Join the Conversation However, as much as these ‘in-house’ improvements would be welcome, they would make a poor exchange for the decline in international standing the UK would experience without the right tools and channels to collaborate with overseas partners.

The UK’s success in creating some of the most effective Covid-19 vaccines is a good example of it leading the field on R&D – but it did so with the support of years of international collaboration and global research behind it. My fear is that, as the world increasingly faces collective challenges, including climate change and the prospect of future pandemics, the UK loses the base momentum maintained by existing global research partnerships. Hearteningly, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)’s budget allocation for the year suggests we will continue to see significant levels of investment being directed to high-growth innovation hubs in the regions, including in Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow – all areas Bruntwood SciTech continues to bring forward new R&D-centric campuses.

Businesses and academics in these areas will be hopeful of returning to Horizon. In the short-term though, they should be channeling the collaborative spirit of the Games and shoring up their relationships with research partners overseas. Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn .

Check out my website . Kath MacKay Editorial Standards Print Reprints & Permissions.