There is work to be done before our research infrastructure is world class, reports Dick Ahlstrom
The Republic's research sector has suffered from years of underinvestment but has still managed to perform reasonably well, according to a study published yesterday. We have a small number of world-class laboratories and our rate of scientific publication matches or slightly exceeds world averages.
The report also shows, however, that we have a great deal of ground to cover if we are to develop a knowledge-based economy, as the Government intends. It indicates that we lack the critical mass that could generate economies of scale and that we suffer from a high degree of research "fragmentation".
The study, by Forfás, the policy and advisory board for enterprise, trade, science, technology and innovation, is entitled Baseline Assessment Of The Public Research System In Ireland In The Areas Of Biotechnology And Information And Communications Technology.
It examined only these two areas, as they are the funding targets for Science Foundation Ireland and the €640 million it has to spend by 2006. The report is meant to be a measure against which progress can be assessed.
"We organised the study on behalf of Science Foundation Ireland," says Michael Fitzgibbon, head of Forfás's research evaluation and indicators unit. "One of the stipulations from the Government was that a baseline study would be carried out on the situation before SFI came on stream, so we could see the changes afterwards. The evaluation was done by an international team headed up by Technopolis Ltd in the UK."
The study had three main elements, starting with a comprehensive list of researchers working here and the work they do. This formed the basis for a "bibliometric" analysis by Leiden University, in the Netherlands. It assessed researchers' publication and citation rates - how frequently researchers in other labs referred to the original publications. The final part of the study involved creating two panels of scientific experts, one on information and communications technology and one on biotechnology. Their members visited the country's top 36 laboratories, to look at facilities and meet researchers.
The report's broad conclusions suggest that, despite the tough times before Government funding started to come on stream under the National Development Plan, Irish researchers had done pretty well. "They recognised the difficulties under which the researchers were working and felt they had done extremely well under the circumstances," says Fitzgibbon.
Even so, the report exposed many weaknesses in research infrastructure and procedures. "The performance was quite good, but there was an overall lack of critical mass," says Fitzgibbon. The report also noted the "significant underfunding of the research base" over years, which forced researchers to "behave opportunistically" in their search for funding. It says researchers here are expected to teach more than their peers in the US or on the Continent. There is also a shortage of posts for postdoctoral students, who could take on some of the burden, overseeing PhD and MSc students.
And a lack of clear career opportunities "will make it hard for research groups to attract the best international applicants", the report says. Yet it believes a lack of graduates will force research teams to seek staff abroad in spite of these difficulties.
On the bibliometric results, the study found that Irish researchers were "slightly above the world average for biotechnology" and "at or slightly above the world average for ICT research". Fitzgibbon adds, however, that "average" was not the goal set by the Government with its heavy investment in science. "The message is, if we want to aim higher than that, there is a lot to be done."
The report also found that, in both biotech and ICT, the research base is not competitive enough to deal with all the funding headed for it and "will not be able effectively to continue to utilise large injections of project-based funding".