|
|
Web version of overhead slides given in Presentations by Dr Chris Langley, ScienceSources Consultancy
A freelance scientific consultancy which works to broaden the public accountability of science, technology & medicine and its products
Available only to non-profit organisations in Europe and the USA
Soldiers in the laboratory: Military involvement in science and technology - and some alternatives
The situation in the UK during the past 20 years. Comparisons made with other EU countries & the USA. First broad-based study of the UK situation
Primary focus - research & development but also other areas within SET across public institutions
Literature-based survey of the military sector involvement with SET - research, teaching and PR. Some interviews & discussions also undertaken. Web material also used
The military is: government departments, corporations and others!
Histories over the last two decades of the three major players:
the universities
the military industry
the government - various departments
The socioeconomic backdrop against which these three players interact
The products of the interplay:
partnerships & other collaborations
the military presence & its impact on research & funding culture
the military agenda & broadly defined security concerns
SET & its research landscape
Where in SET is the military sector to be found? Locations described in the Report.
What role does the military play in the UK & its impact on SET in practical and ethical ways? IPR, openness & lock-in.
What return does the taxpayer obtain for military funding of R&D? Spin-out and spin-in.
How well does the military serve security needs? Contrast between narrow power-based version and more inclusive security needs for the world.
What role does technology serve in security debates?
1.
Ministry of Defence
The Ministry of Defence uses a major proportion of its R&D budget to find suitable products for its contractors to produce:
2.
Other government departments - their military role
3. Military corporations and other players
1. Science Budget - non military
2. Private - Wellcome & charities
3.
Commercial funding
The scale of the military machine
Global military burden is currently US$1trillion.
In the EU military R&D budgets are largely represented by small number of nations:
In 2000 these 4 countries represented 97% of the total EU countries' defence budget (almost 9 billion Euros)
The UK spends 30% of all government R&D on military objectives
In the UK the military industry has a yearly turnover of over £15 billion
Major national and international military corporations are found in USA, UK & France
The USA spends more than 50% of its total government R&D budget on military objectives
The US 2004-9 Defence Plan budget will increase by around $40 billion dollars yearly to well over US$400 billion per year
Post September 11th vast increase in funding of research into areas of military interest such as bioterrorism, bioengineering, nanotechnology and surveillance - coupled with cuts in fundamental research.
Homeland security has a weapons-based portfolio
What the USA does impacts on research process and open nature of science across the world
Ministry of Defence puts almost £3 billion into SET R&D per year - contrast with many non-military SET areas
Military corporations in the UK add a further £100 million into SET R&D
There are additional non-research funding by the military - corporations plus the MoD, DTI and the FO - education, PR, and image creation
Military spending in UK is ahead of all areas save health, social services and education. Research areas which do not have military interest are often the orphans
In the last 3 years new consortia announced comprising universities, military corporations & government departments
Military corporations include the largest commercial enterprises on the planet - Boeing in 2002 had revenues of $54 billion - BAE Systems has yearly sales in 130 countries to the tune of more than £12 billion
Military funds = weapons-based objectives in context of commercialisation of universities & the research process
During the last 15 years: military corporations are now in: government, local agencies, universities & lobby via special interest groups
Military research interests now found across SET especially the physical & engineering sciences
Restructuring of Government Defence Research Establishments & post-1990's market forces. The birth of DSTL and QinetiQ
A very brief history of the commercialisation of UK universities
1993 - MoD creates an Executive Agency Defence Research Agency - DRA
1995 - Defence Research Agency plus a range of Defence Establishments form Defence Evaluation Research Agency (DERA)
DERA
1. DRA - retain former activities
2. DTEO - test and evaluation
3. CBDE - mainly chemical and biological defence
4. Centre for Defence Analysis
1998 - DERA set up Defence Diversification Agency
2001-2003 - DERA becomes DSTL and QinetiQ
1970s & 1980s:
More active management of SET plus growth of science & innovation parks - linking industries with the universities - started with MIT & followed in the UK by Cambridge and Heriot-Watt
Cuts in the funding of higher education - second wave of science parks
1993 - Realizing our potential - aimed to give a better match between publicly funded strategic research and the needs of industry
1994 - Foresight Panels set up by DTI
1995 - OST moves to DTI from Cabinet Office. Relaunch of the LINK programme
1998 - Council for Science & Technology reborn. The Knowledge-driven economy
2000 - Excellence & opportunity published
A consolidation of military funding of SET within universities in consortia:
Defence & Aerospace Research Partnerships - 6 up & running at present
Towers of Excellence - currently 5
Defence Technology Centres - also 4
A suite of industrial/university 'partnerships' - Rolls Royce UTCs began in 1990s; Manufacturing initiatives - BAE & Boeing
Staff & student support from the military corporations & the ex-DERA laboratories - QinetiQ - professorships, lectureships, student bursaries, curriculum tools plus public relations
Joint Grant Scheme - MoD/Research Councils
Defence & Aerospace Research Partnerships - 6 active
Rolls Royce & BAE major players
Areas: design; simulation; modelling; materials; data handling
Universities involved include: Bristol, Cambridge, Cranfield, Glasgow, Imperial, Leicester, Loughborough, Southampton, Surrey, Sussex, Swansea & York
Funders: MoD, EPSRC, DTI. Total value of DARPS £18 million in 2002-03
Towers of Excellence - 5
Involves research groups in former DERA laboratories, military corporations & universities. Funders are MoD, QinetiQ & DTI
Areas of research at sub-system level: guided weapons; radar; synthetic environments; underwater sensors & electro-optic sensors
Plans for 25 Towers - with research student training
The Intellectual Property Rights issue not clear - civilian utility?
Universities currently: Birmingham, Cranfield, Sheffield, Surrey & Imperial College
Defence Technology Centres - 4
Areas at present covered: Data & Information Fusion; Human Factors Integration; Electromagnetic Remote Sensing; autonomous systems engineering
Consortia comprise MoD, military corporation and university partner. Funding is 50:50 MoD and industrial partner - £10 million each year for 3 to 5 years
Student training a key element
BAE is a major player
The EU Framework Programme
NATO Science Programme
Lobby groups in aerospace - civil & military
Increasing impetus for EU 'Defence' programme with associated R&D
US Government funding, especially the Departments of Defense and Energy, in the UK - US$90 million in 2003.
Porton Down and biotechnology
Weaponisation of space - missile defense
Nanotechnology in the UK & USA
Aldermaston & the technological arms race: mini-nukes and the 'non-lethal' devices
New approaches to broadly defined security
Land mines & antipersonnel devices
Poverty & security
Climate change mitigation & clean energy
Security issues transformed in last ten years - whereas current military support drives weapons- based approach
Lack of public accountability & discussion. Lock-in of military support for new technologies
The predominance of one or two very powerful corporations throughout the agenda-setting process in SET
Conflict resolution takes the back seat - arms escalation fuelled by SET expertise
Intellectual Property Rights issues leavened by secrecy - National Security!
There is a heavily commercial agenda for science & little room for alternate voices
Science, engineering and technology have a vital role to play in addressing pressing needs - these are poorly funded in comparison to military objectives:
climate change amelioration, clean energy technologies, biodiversity decline, poverty and supply of clean water & proper sanitation - unequal support in the face of the military machine
Technological imperative sets unreasonable claims in conflict - clean solutions to complex multidimensional issues
Obtain a copy of the SGR Report or the Executive Summary which has key points & recommendations - then circulate, circulate and circulate again!
Question where, how and why research programmes are being set up with military funding
Open up debate and lobby suitable people. We are going to produce an ethical briefing on career choice in those areas that attract military funding - these will be sent to all universities
Slow process but change can occur - there are examples of change from military to security-based objectives.
There is a broad-based
movement to build an ethical science and this discussion tonight
is a step in the right direction
Some good news
Ordinary people have power - boycotts, demonstrations & pressure on government
Obtain a copy of the SGR Report or the Executive Summary which has key points & recommendations - read & then circulate!
Question where, how & why research programmes are being set up with military funding
Open up debate & lobby. We are going to produce an ethical briefing on career choice in those areas that attract military funding - these will be sent to all universities
It is often slow, but change can occur - there are examples of change from military to security-based objectives.
There is a broad-based movement to build an ethical science & this discussion today is part of a growing process
 |
 |
 |
 |
Military Influence SectionFor further information contact Dr Chris Langley Send
correspondence about
the web-site to webmanager@sgr.org.uk |
|||