Texts of presentations by Chris Langley, SGR, to Pugwash Ethical Science Group, Imperial College, London, October 2005, and Totton Sixth-Form College, Southampton, November, 2005
Scope of the project:
-
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!
The focus of the project:
-
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
-
Major questions which the project posed:
-
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?
Military spending on SET R&D - the UK & other countries
The key focus was:
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:
- Procurement of weapons & support systems
- 'Advanced technology solutions' & demonstration
2. Other government departments - their military role
3. Military corporations and other players
Non-military spending
1. Science Budget - non military
2. Private - Wellcome & charities
3. Commercial funding
Some of the findings:
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:
- UK
- Spain
- Germany
- France
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 wider picture
-
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
The military sector and UK SET
-
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
The military influence
-
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
A step back for a whistlestop tour
-
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
Government Defence Research Establishments - all change
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
Commercialisation & the universities
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
Military funding - the New Wave
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 influence of Europe & the USA
-
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.
Case studies - the military dimension
-
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
Case studies - non-military dimension
-
New approaches to broadly defined security
-
Land mines & antipersonnel devices
-
Poverty & security
-
Climate change mitigation & clean energy
Military funding - so what's the problem?
-
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
What can we do?
-
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