No abstract

SIR-Terence Kealey's rosy-hued vision of the growth of British science (Nature 350, 370; 1991) defies belief. I must draw attention to the gross and chronic inadequacy of the public monies available through the socalled dual-support system for funding the indirect (but real) cost of research whose direct costs are provided by research councils and UK charities. The facts are as follows. (1) The Department of Education and Science (DES), the Universities Funding Council (UFC, formerly the University Grants Committee, UGC) and the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (CVCP) have all urged universities to recover the full costs of all research undertaken, rather than drive themselves into insolvency. In particular, we were urged to adopt the Hanham formula which shows that the typical level of indirect cost is 60 per cent of the direct costs for any given project. (2) For research where the direct costs have been borne by research councils and UK charities, the indirect costs, under the dualsupport system, have been provided as DR by the UGC/UFC. (DR is UFC research money distributed to universities according to their research grant income from the research councils and charities.) (3) However, compared with the 60 per cent required, DR has never exceeded 31.5 per cent and has declined steadily to 23 per cent. This comparison between 60 per cent and 23 per cent is unaffected by international comparisons, gross domestic product, inflation or anything else. It represents chronic failure of the dual-support system to do what it is supposed to do. In 1990-91, the shortfall across the system is £160 million. (4) Recent case analyses conducted by the research councils and several universities (including University College London) confirm the 'Hanham 60 per cent' and will no doubt influence the sum sought by the Advisory Board for the Research Councils from the UFC to meet the proposed transfer of responsibility. (5) The shortfall, though, is not a result of that transfer, but is, rather, the result of gross underfunding of the UFC by the DES and the Treasury.

No abstract