The government broadly welcomed recent recommendations from the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee in its report on engineering biology. The committee recommended the need to improve access to scale-up infrastructure and to support and develop new skills.
However, what are the practical steps that can be taken to allow ideas to be scaled up in the future? Here, Duncan Lugton, Head of Policy and Impact at the Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE), who submitted evidence to the House of Lords’ inquiry, examines the key issues highlighted in the report that must be addressed to translate it into tangible results.
Making scale-up a core focus of the report is a good move from the House of Lords. Don’t fail to scale: seizing the opportunity of engineering biology outlines the broad and deep strengths the UK has in this field, but there are several difficulties that we highlighted to the committee that need to be addressed.
These problems fall into four areas: access to facilities to scale-up, a lack of skills, the cultural difference between academia and business, and talent leaving the UK for countries with better scale up capacity such as Belgium and the Netherlands. While scientists may start off with a great idea in the UK, the conditions to scale-up elsewhere often prove more attractive – even beyond the economic heavyweights of China and the US.
Moving from the lab
While many innovations take place in a laboratory, there comes a point when you need access to bigger facilities and equipment to take your innovation to the next level and produce at a higher volume. But access to these facilities in the UK is currently too limited. There isn’t a silver bullet to address the problem; instead, a multi-pronged approach is required.
This includes changing the funding structures for innovation centres, improving access to this infrastructure with the help of government and the private sector, while training enough chemical engineers whose skills are a crucial ingredient in taking ideas to scale.
Government should play a key role here by subsidising access to innovation centres, developing new ones or brokering arrangements to increase access in parts of the country where it is limited. Given the emphasis the government has put on both devolution and economic growth since taking office last summer; investment in the infrastructure required for engineering biology can help spread opportunity throughout the country. This in turn can create jobs, generate economic growth, improve industrial processes and help the development of sustainable practices.
Training
Beyond investment, training is crucial. The government can support scientists’ training, but industry involvement is equally necessary, particularly given the UK’s fiscal constraints.
However, it’s not just about money, as other reforms can be made to help alleviate the problem. Training needs can be addressed with changes to the academic syllabus at universities to include more entrepreneurial skills. Entrepreneurship seems to be a key factor holding back engineering biology in the UK. Scientists in the UK are trained to be scientists and are not encouraged to develop a commercial mindset. But when it comes to scaling up innovations, a commercial mindset is crucial.
Bringing together the two different worlds of academia and industry is what’s required to scale up. Ways to achieve this include industry-academia exchanges, mentoring schemes and communities of practice. These ideas would all help spread those entrepreneurial skills and best practice that are crucial here.
One example of a current scheme that we’d like to see more of is the Ready for Industry Programme run by the Industrial Biotechnology Information Innovation Centre (IBioIC). This is a good example of a scheme that provides technical, commercial and personal growth training. It is industry-led and there’s a requirement that participants work with an industrial partner.
The programme also fosters connections between researchers, academics and companies, bringing all the necessary skillsets required for scaling up together. In addition, such schemes allow scientists to develop other necessary skills including communication, marketing and leadership expertise.
Not just investment
Government also needs to prioritise investment in training chemical engineers as they have the skills that are essential to scaling up innovations.
As well as changes to what people are taught, the government has a role to play in steering the direction of research funding. This doesn’t necessarily mean more money, but giving greater emphasis to the funding of applied research would allow us to see more work that has that practical edge and is closer to being able to be scaled up.
The previous government committed to £2bn over the course of the decade, but the current government hasn’t yet set out its precise funding commitment in this area. We would like to see government investment in this area split proportionally between more fundamental research on the one hand and more applied research on the other, to ensure that the money has maximum impact.
There is also scope for the government to make the landscape more competitive via tax relief for startups in this area, making a talent drain less likely. The business environment is a major factor for where people choose to scale up their innovations – by making the UK more attractive, people will be less likely to relocate elsewhere. As engineering biology has been identified by the government as a core opportunity for growth, such action would support their warm words.
In addition, universities and organisations like IChemE have an important role in spreading best practice and networking people. Connecting and training members, mentorship programmes and placements for scientists going into industry are both examples of how other organisations can take the initiative without government help, or the need for a huge cash injection.
Organisations like IChemE are very close to the industry and are best placed to represent the views of the chemical engineering sector when working with government to develop policy. We can act as a direct link between science, industry and with those in office.
For more articles like this, visit our Leadership channel.
