New Scientist - 31 May 2014.bak

OPINION
A vote against science
UKIP’s strong showing in the European elections could be the first
step towards disaster for British researchers, warns Michael Brooks
POLITICS has become a strange
place. In last week’s European
Parliament elections, many right
wing parties, some of them
extreme, got into their stride.
The upshot is that the elected
body of the European Union will
be stuffed to the gunnels with
people who would rather it didn’t
exist, but will now spend the next
five years representing their
constituents there.
Prominent among them is
Nigel Farage, leader of the UK
Independence Party (UKIP).
Already a member of the
European Parliament, Farage’s
main aim is to get the UK out of
the EU. Its freedom of movement
rules have caused an influx of
migrant workers, which has
served as the backdrop to UKIP’s
rise. While the UK remains within
the EU, it is impossible to stem
this “tide”, Farage says, and
withdrawal is the only solution.
While political scientists watch
this narrative unfold with
fascination, natural scientists
in the UK should do so with
alarm; Farage could turn out to
be a disaster for them.
That’s because they have a lot
to lose. In global terms, the UK
punches above its weight in
science. Although our population
makes up just 1 per cent of the
global total, scientists here
publish 16 per cent of the world’s
most-cited research papers. EU
policy is to “encourage the highest
quality research in Europe
through competitive funding... on
the basis of scientific excellence”.
What this means is that British
scientists get a disproportionate
amount of money from the EU.
For every £1 we contribute to
the research pot, we get
approximately £1.40 back.
If we were to withdraw in the
way UKIP hopes, we would lose
access to the source of much
of this funding: the European
Research Council. British
scientists would also lose
influence over the research
agenda and would be unable
to control the distribution of
funding across research areas.
Just as importantly, they would
haemorrhage collaborators.
The days of the lone scientist
are largely gone. International
collaboration is now vital and
near-ubiquitous. More than a
third of the papers published in
high quality journals are the
result of such links, and EUfunded
science projects require
the involvement of at least three
different member or associate
states.
Ousted from Europe, British
scientists would be out in the
cold. We know this because it has
already happened to scientists in
Switzerland, a non-EU state that
until recently enjoyed access to
EU research funding.
At the end of February, Swiss
voters rejected a deal that would
“British scientists get a
disproportionate amount
of money from the EU.
They have a lot to lose”
allow Croatians free movement
across the country’s borders. It
was a result of campaigning by
the Swiss People’s Party, which
is Eurosceptic and wants strict
limits on immigration, just like
UKIP. Limiting the movement of
people from the newest member
state didn’t comply with EU
principles, so Switzerland was
stripped of its “associate
member” status.
Associate members enjoy
almost full participation in EU
programmes, including research
projects funded from the EU pot.
Switzerland, however, now has
“third country” status, on a par
with the US and Japan.
The latest set of EU-funded
projects is known as Horizon
2020 and has about £65 billion to
allocate over the next six years.
Swiss researchers are now
excluded from receiving any of
its grants. Before February, Swiss
students could get grants to work
in labs anywhere in Europe under
the EU’s Erasmus programme –
not any more.
Researchers report that, as
a result, Switzerland has lost
international competitiveness.
There is a brain drain as senior
researchers head to countries
where they can access EU funds.
Young researchers are also
leaving – many of them rely on
the kudos of prestigious EU grants
to advance their careers. In other
countries, Swiss scientists are
being shed as collaborators.
Christian Sengstag, head of
research at the University of Basel
in Switzerland, warned in April
that the top candidates for
research jobs “will think twice
28 | NewScientist | 31 May 2014