Commercialisation of science
The increasingly profit driven management of our universities distorts student curricula and curtails scientific inquiry. Universities today face a unrelenting assault by the forces of neoliberalism which is transforming them from institutes of scholarship into businesses. Factories for entrepreneurs and outsourced R&D producing profits for private capital and a parasitic management class.
Today our best scientists spend more time applying for grants than doing research. They find themselves interrogated every step of the way, demanded to explain how RNA silencing insures the “uk remains internationally competitive” or how Supersymetry would benefit the economy. Universities administrations evaluate researchers based on their grant income and the innumerate 'statistics' of Human Resources, the scientific value of their work is increasingly irrelevant. The result is a degrading work environment, shallow uninspired science, precarious conditions and rising corruption.
The Student population find their dreamt of future corrupted and themselves immersed in an environment moulding them into the image of the universities paymasters. It is a process that begins even before joining the university. At every open day graduate employment rates and salary take centre stage, unavoidably so when students face the burdens of rising debt. The whole university experience is becoming just another exercise in 'enhancing your CV' where course content is tailored and chosen based on its employability. Learning has been superseded by training.
The principle ideal of the university historically was to facilitate the pursuit of knowledge and understanding both of individual students and as a society. This has fundamentally depended on the fierce independence of the academic community and an openness within itself. If we sacrifice these things in for the sake of short term gains in corporate profits we risk loosing our ability to deal with fundamental social and technical crisis like climate change.
history/neoliberal context
The second world war ended in a spectacular and horrifying manner when the United States dropped the first nuclear warheads. At the turn of the century the very existence of atoms was still uncertain and very much an abstract theoretical issue, now they drove the most powerful weapon in the world. It is no surprise then that throughout the cold war era that support for basic research was deeply embedded in both western and eastern university systems.
The so called post war settlement held up science and education as public goods to be supported by plentiful public funds and academic freedom. Of course in this period public good really meant national good, much of the funding came from military sources. Scientific competition often found itself serving as a proxy for military conflict and academic freedom was not just a source of effective research practice but a powerful ideological tool.
The end of the cold war and the collapse of social democracy made way for globalisation and neoliberalism, in this brave new world the pacts that held together the public university began to unravel.
imaginary numbers/effect on academics
Research funding from public sources in the UK is primarily controlled by the research council system. The total available funds is determined by the government but how this is distributed is nominally an autonomous decision by academics. This split, known as the Haldane Principle, developed from the foundations of the council system in 1918 and has been eroded steadily since the beginning of the new labour era.
The role of the research councils has been to isolate the practice of science from the vagaries of markets and governments. The greatest scientific developments have rarely been the result of pursuing 'wealth creation' or 'end user impact' and there is every reason to believe they cannot be.
When J J Thompson discovered the electron he could never have conceived of the results. Of television, radiotherapy, the subsequent discovery of quantum mechanics and the whole edifice of modern technology. That nobody has yet put the Higgs to work in industry is no argument against the value of the LHC.
The words of Dirac are as true now as ever that “the measure of the greatness of a scientific idea is the extent to which it stimulates thought and opens up new lines of research”. On the other hand the loosening of scientific criteria in favour of the crass commercialism has closed lines of research and lead to narrow short-termist thinking.
The restructuring of science has occurred on two fronts, one ideological the other financial.
The so called 'impact agenda' is nothing more than the particular realisation of the much broader neoliberal project, wherein public good and economic growth become interchangeable. University management has been transformed, colonised by private sector bureaucrats brought in on the dictates of government priorities and think tank reports. Historical structures of participatory decision making have been disassembled, centralised executives supplanting councils and senates.
Warwick has lead the charge, having collapsed 30 departments into four faculties. The 2003 Lambert Report singles it out, “Warwick... remains committed to a centralised management structure.” and is shockingly open in its aims, lamenting “Older universities, with a longer tradition of participatory government, tend to take longer... to rationalise its committee structures.”.
The new management has sought tighter ties to the private sector, seeking to 'streamline' research into commercially viable products and “to ensure that the system of funding undergraduate teaching is sufficiently responsive to produce graduates with skills that the economy needs.”.
Convinced of their own infallibility by an ideology an idolises the entrepreneur or leader, this new management apparatus seeks to reduce the operations of the university to precisely controlled mechanical operation, a production line.
Ignorant of both scholarship and of statistics management demands precise tunable statistics, regardless of the actual applicability of such techniques, every variable must be quantified and controlled. Experts might protests they fall on death ears and eventually they concede, producing something that, however arbitrary, becomes the gospel of the university.
It is under this guise of scientific management, of faux statistics, that mass redundancies are justified. Professor David Colquhoun recalls “your meetings with senior colleagues consist of harassment about what journals you publish in, and how many grants you have, not a discussion of your scientific aims.”.
The particular measures differ but the irrationality remains the same. The measures used by Imperial College Medical school for staff targets and by Queen Mary's to justify redundancies in 2012 would both have fired Nobel Prize winners and, because they were based on the number of papers written, encouraged shallow science or even fraud. When one academic dared to criticise the policy they were accused of gross misconduct and subject to disciplinary investigation.
Of course all of this achieves entirely the opposite of what the administration claims to desire. For those who declare the need for efficient use of tax payers money it seems utterly bizarre to focus on funding commercial projects. These developments are supposedly what the private sector should be suited to dealing with, these university projects are nothing more than back-door subsidisation. Pointless quantisation encourages exaggerated impacts, reduces willingness to repeat experiments and incentives fraud.
While the net income of universities has grown steadily since the turn of the millennium the sources of this have changed radically. Government funding comes from two main sources, research council funding and the HEFCE teaching grants, between 2012 and 2015 the HEFCE grant has halved. While some of this has been made up by shifting the burden to students via tuition fee rises, there is also a much greater dependence on industry sources.
Faced with a funding crisis the inevitable response of the new management regime has been to marketize the operations of the university even if this sacrifices its scholarly tasks. Academics are left with ever less time to pursue research or teaching, universities are increasingly operating as government subsidised consulting firms. Conferences, intended to be an open space for the sharing of knowledge, are being increasingly monetised pricing out smaller institutions and participation by up and coming researchers.
The course of research itself is being diverted for commercial gain on two basis. Firstly a massive internal pressure to focus research on those areas that offer marketable IP claims or produce spin off companies, income from IP has increased 93% since 2001. This leads to a bias towards making new observations rather than developing deeper understanding or pursuing close to market projects that do not require the unique capacities of the university.
Secondly, the approach to research council funds, which now demand economic impacts, citation statistics and publication history to distribute grants. Universities often take up to 60% of these grants as 'overhead' and increasingly employment depends on being able to capture enough grants to pay your own salary. Not only does this put immense demands on a academics time it also incentives bad science.
The intense competition for grants encourages following fads over independent thinking, adds enormous pressure to overstate results, disincentives repeat studies and publication of negative results – essential self corrective processes.
Phds and Grad students suffer resultantly, they are often the last priority for a researchers time but are also used as proxies and cheap labour. Either fulfilling teaching duty to free up a supervisors time or conducting research that they can put their name to with little regard to learning or scientific content.
Hope is not lost, there are those that resist and there always will be.
“If we can't think for ourselves, if we're unwilling to question authority, then we're just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us. In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method...this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.” ― Carl Sagan