Written evidence submitted by University of Glasgow (USC0003)

Scottish Affairs Committee Inquiry: Universities and Scotland

Scotland benefits from a world-leading higher education ecosystem and our universities are both a national asset – catalysts of innovation, social mobility and inclusive growth – and an international pole of attraction, central to Scotland’s global reputation.

The impact of Scottish universities on society and the economy has been particularly strong during the pandemic. Our own institution, the University of Glasgow, has played a significant role in the fight against COVID-19 from hosting Scotland’s only Lighthouse Lab to our MRC Centre for Virus Research experts analysing the genetic code of the virus, and leading new clinical trials. Researchers and departments from across the University are participating in coronavirus-related research from diagnostics and participating in the Oxford vaccine trial to research on the impact of lockdown on mental health and chronic health issues. Moreover, hundreds of our staff and students have volunteered their time, skills and expertise to the NHS and to the local Glasgow community during the pandemic: delivering food packages, working on the frontline and running free online classes and sessions to support vulnerable and shielded members of the community. Our universities have also worked quickly and carefully to ensure our students continue to receive a world-class educational experience, albeit differently and through a model of blended learning. Staff from across our institution and across the sector more generally, have worked tirelessly to ensure uninterrupted provision of learning, teaching and support for our students.

The rapid and creative response demonstrated by Scotland’s HE sector in the face of the pandemic illustrates how universities are key to addressing the various strategic challenges we as a country face, whether through equipping young people with the skills they require to thrive in a changing economy, reinforcing Scotland’s post-Brexit resilience, or supporting the national recovery as we emerge from the pandemic.

The impact of universities on society and the economy has been keenly felt during the pandemic. However, universities have always- and will always- make a significant contribution to society and the economy. In modern economic theory, it is well established that two key drivers of economic growth, through their impact on productivity growth, are skills development and R&D. Higher Education sits at the heart of both these processes, which is why it is so important for the sector’s perspective to be central to any discussions surrounding policy and funding at both UK level and devolved nation level.

COVID-19 is an inflection point and one which will have a material and strategic impact on the sector. Scotland benefits hugely from having a small number of institutions ranked within the world’s top 200. It drives innovation, pulls in talent and ensures that we remain competitive in relation to our peers, whether across the UK or elsewhere. To safeguard the stability of the sector, and further cultivate this ecosystem, now is the time for a bold, imaginative and wide-ranging conversation about the contribution we can make to the country as whole. Simply put, in a challenging environment where resource is likely to be constrained, HE cannot afford to stand still. The University, therefore, welcomes this opportunity to participate in this inquiry and contribute to the important discussions surrounding funding and the impact of UK policy on Scottish universities.

This submission consists of a collection of recommendations from relevant experts across the University of Glasgow. This response will focus on the following key issues set out in the Terms of Reference:

1. The scale and nature of challenges and opportunities around funding for Scottish universities including funding models, deficits, overseas and EU students’ fees

Challenges:

Pandemic

• The economic crisis created by the pandemic has led to a strain on finances across every sector in the UK and universities have faced uncertainty regarding the availability and amount of funding for the HE sector. The Scottish Government’s investment of £75M in May for universities was very welcome alongside additional funding for student hardship, digital poverty and capital projects. The UK Government has funded costed extensions of research projects through UKRI and has pledged a loan plus grant package to UK universities which should be formally launched soon. The scope and amount for this package of support is currently unknown and we look forward to this announcement in due course. However, the unpredictability of the length of the pandemic and the economic crisis means that universities continue to face uncertainty around their income and future funding streams.
• Funding for COVID-19 research has diverted research funding from other areas such as research charities which typically work closely with academia on joint projects. The pandemic has also led to a delay in many areas across R&D- including data collection, conference participation, carrying out fieldwork etc. Funding was made available earlier in the year to UK universities and research organisations impacted by coronavirus through UKRI to extend these projects. However, further disruption to research due to further waves of the pandemic could add to these costs, and this support should be kept under review.
• Due to the pandemic, universities have also been unable to address a shortfall in funding through typical income-generating activities such as international student fee income, events and conferences. 
• To mitigate these risks where possible, the University of Glasgow has rapidly developed a blended model of teaching which will be deployed during the current academic year. We have also reviewed the timescale of our next strategic plan so that this is developed through a peri/post-COVID lens. And we continue to engage with a range of stakeholders, including both the Scottish and UK Governments, to profile how the sustainability of the research base can be safeguarded.

International students

• The loss of revenue from potential issues with international student recruitment poses a significant challenge for the sector, which must be understood.
• At present, our own institution has not yet experienced the sharp decline in international student numbers which we anticipated at the peak of the pandemic, but there has been a noticeable decline in international student numbers across the sector. Many of our international postgraduate students from key markets are still to arrive or enrol for their later start dates in October, November and January. The full impact of the pandemic on our own institution’s ability to recruit international students is still not fully clear and as we approach a second wave, the possibility of further global travel restrictions and another lockdown must factor into our planning.
• Currently, nearly 60,000 international students from 180 countries come to study in Scotland each year. Not only do these students enrich our campuses and add to the broader student experience, but they are a significant economic driver, contributing a net £1.94 billion to the Scottish economy. Over the last five years, the international student population has grown by 25% and we know that recent graduates are more likely to do business with Scotland as a result of studying here. Notwithstanding the challenging external environment we face, we must recognise the social and economic importance of internationalisation, harness this soft power and continue to warmly welcome students from around the world to Scotland.

Brexit

• As aforementioned, funding for research has already been impacted as a result of the pandemic and with Brexit, participation in Horizon Europe and other EU research schemes will also be lost.  There is also uncertainty over the funding which may replace these schemes.
• Brexit will also impact upon Scotland and the UK’s ability to attract scarce talent and key sectors linked to HE such as nanotechnology, manufacturing and life sciences which rely on a flow of people with high-level skills. Brexit risks creating a ‘bottleneck’ in these skills and it is important to consider how this supply can remain sustainable post-Brexit.
• The UK Government should continue to work with the sector and the Scottish Government to profile Scotland’s differentiated need for skilled immigration and how access to talent can be maintained. Furthermore, both actors should explore how they might assist the sector in supporting student mobility and engaging with European research projects once the EU transition period ends.
• The recently introduced UK Internal Market Bill will replace current EU provisions and could lead to a significant impact on the capacity of devolved nations to set out funding policy. This could have a significant impact on free tuition for Scottish students, a model which has worked well in Scotland for over a decade, supporting fair access to HE for students from all backgrounds and aligns with other leading European countries in giving free tuition to home students. The Bill’s provisions on market access for services may also allow a HE provider authorised in one part of the UK to provide services throughout the UK, this could significantly impact upon the competitiveness of the sector in Scotland. Further clarity is needed on the impact of the Internal Market Bill on the HE sector and we would urge the UK Government to provide this clarity as swiftly as possible. The Internal Market Bill does not feature specifically in the terms of reference for this enquiry, but it may be an issue the Committee wishes to spend time discussing the implications of.

R&D Funding

• This will be discussed further in this submission, but in broad terms, there are challenges surrounding the translation of funding from UK Government level to universities in the devolved nations. Oftentimes when the UK Government announces an increase in funding for UK universities, through Quality-related (QR) funding for example, this does not translate at all to Scottish institutions.
• Maintaining Scotland’s provision of world-class R&D and educational ecosystems should continue to be a priority in the years ahead. If, as anticipated, there is a major investment in research funding at UK level via UKRI, the new ARPA agency and other routes, it is important that Scottish funding keeps pace with this investment. Overall, it is important that research funding is sustainable, and there is widespread recognition that it is currently cross-subsidised from non-publicly funded teaching activity.

Opportunities:

Build Back Better

• The pandemic has allowed us to reflect on what we value as a society- health, education, science and wellbeing. We should use the pandemic as a point of inflection and to recalibrate our priorities as a society to focus on skills and education. This will allow for the re-skilling, training and upskilling of workers to suit the needs of the economy. In particular, by equipping our young people with a wide array of knowledge and skills, we are more likely to build a resilient and flexible workforce capable of adapting to a changing economy.
• Scotland has a competitive advantage in science and technology and identifying and investing in key sectors of strength such as biotechnology, genomics, Precision Medicine, quantum technology, life sciences, AI, energy & low-carbon technologies will allow for the prioritisation of areas where the UK and Scotland can truly be competitive. Scottish universities are the envy of many around the world and we must leverage them to greater effect- transforming world class research into large-scale commercialisation.
• The University recently welcomed the launch of the Scottish Funding Council’s review into funding for the HE/FE sector in Scotland. We look forward to the first stage of reporting for this review and the opportunity to engage constructively throughout the process

Increased Collaboration

• There is an opportunity for enhanced and increased collaboration between academic institutions across the UK and indeed between universities, industry and the third sector.
• The Government has a role as a facilitator of innovation and collaboration between academia and industry, helping businesses and researchers work together to identify shared goals and strengths to leverage the UK’s advantages in science and technology.
• Funding bodies across the UK should work more closely with universities on planning and collaboration, with the Government acting as a broker of collaboration between academia and industry based on shared common goals and strengths.
• Researchers are naturally inclined to collaborate. To ensure that UK research remains outward-facing, researchers must be supported to identify and leverage opportunities for substantial collaborative UK or international funding. Universities existing efforts could be supported in this aim by the commitment of funding to facilitate large collaborative proposals.

Recognition of Differentiation

• Scotland has globally renowned universities ranked within the world’s top 200 and we remain competitive in relation to our peers, whether across the UK or elsewhere. Protecting and strengthening this national resource is vital. Although research takes place across all universities, research excellence of potentially sustainable scale – as measured by research power – is primarily associated with a small number of institutions. To preserve and strengthen this base, the funding mechanisms that support this research must become more focused, particularly in a context where financial resource is constrained. This was highlighted in the Muscatelli Report for the Scottish Government. Many aspects of this Report would also be applicable to the English regions, and the other devolved Administrations.

• Such a model – backed by a funding environment which recognises and reinforces this diversity of mission – has the potential to preserve quality throughout. Although much of this policy would be determined by the Scottish Government and SFC, the fiscal support for this approach lies with the UK Government and a more joined-up approach to funding and policy decisions is necessary to facilitate such a model.
• In addition, despite producing high-quality and world-changing research, Scottish institutions can miss out on opportunities for UK-wide funding as resources tend to be concentrated towards areas geographically closer to London and the south of England, or the so-called ‘golden triangle’. Therefore, an opportunity exists for the UK Government and its funding bodies to recognise the strengths that lie across the board and to issue more place-based funding opportunities. This will also align with the UK Government’s levelling-up agenda which seeks to address inequalities across the UK. In our own city Glasgow, we have already benefited from such funding via our successful bid to the Strength in Places Initiative.
• UKRI as current constituted does not fully represent Scotland, or indeed the other devolved nations.  UKRI should take steps to ensure representation from across the whole of the UK to allow for innovative activity to be identified across the four nations rather than in one concentrated geographical area. This could take the form of secondment opportunities with universities or by appointing a lead for each devolved nation.

Internationalisation

• Post-Brexit, strengthening existing strategic international partnerships as well as further developing relationships with regional partners around the world should be a key priority and opportunity for the sector.
• At the University of Glasgow, we understand the link between internationalisation and research excellence. As founding members of Universitas 21 and the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities, we are committed to working closely with colleagues across Europe to drive forward collaborative research and knowledge exchange, as well as providing student mobility opportunities and network-building fora for staff. The University also benefits from associate member status with two European University Initiative (EUI) alliances (CIVIS and NeurotechEU) and we are a co-founder of the European Centre for Advanced Studies (ECAS). Moreover, in tandem with our TNE partners – Nankai University, the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), and the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) – we intend to deepen the scope and scale of our research activities in key overseas markets, while continuing to offer students the opportunity to study for a University of Glasgow degree. And we will continue building strategic alliances with a range of global partners from the University of the West Indies, to the University of Sydney and the Smithsonian Institution.
• Both the UK Government and Scottish Government should assess how they might support the HE sector to preserve and enhance such international activity – particularly in those areas aligned to broader economic/innovation priorities.
  
  
   

2. How Scottish university research fits in with UK university research

Scotland's universities have a global reputation for excellent research as evidenced through previous REF exercises and the percentage of funding won from UK research funders compared to the relative size of the research base.

At the University of Glasgow, we are leading the UK in fields such as Precision Medicine, quantum technology and nanofabrication- whilst Scotland in general is highly competitive in areas such as the life sciences and biomedical sciences sector, renewable technologies and as outlined in the Scottish Government’s Logan Review, digital and green technologies.

Funding for university research in Scotland is delivered via a dual support mechanism comprising a block grant given by the SFC alongside competitively awarded grants from UK-wide research councils. UKRI has a dual role covering both devolved responsibilities through Research England, and also acts as a UK-wide agency through the research councils and Innovate UK. As a result, although research councils cover the entirety of the UK, Research England only focuses on English institutions and there is a tendency to slip from a focus on the whole of the UK to a focus on just England. One potential solution to this would be to appoint a UKRI lead for each devolved nation as mentioned previously so that UKRI will have a firmer grasp on the research potential across the whole of the UK. Research England leads REF collaboration from the UK’s four nations effectively and illustrates that it is possible to have truly UK-wide collaboration and representation led by a body like Research England.

Furthermore, there is a differentiation in how research funding is distributed to Scottish universities compared to UK universities. In England, Quality-related (QR) funding is distributed to institutions as a block grant dependent on the quality profile from the REF, whilst in Scotland the equivalent is known as a Research Excellence Grant (REG). Therefore, when the UK Government announces an increase in QR funding for UK universities, this may not translate to Scottish universities at all, unless the additional investment triggers a consequential through the Barnett formula, and this is passed on to the SFC for distribution through REG. Moreover, there is also differentiation when it comes to Knowledge Exchange (KE) funding in the UK. KE activity is designed to incentivise universities to produce research which helps society but the infrastructure in place to provide this incentivisation is different across the UK. In Scotland, KE funding is available through the SFC’s University Innovation Fund (UIF) to incentivise knowledge exchange research through alignment with the Scottish Government’s objectives and is a significantly smaller pot of money than the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) available in England. HEIF provides a pot of around £213M for KE initiatives in English universities and institutions are incentivised to align KE research with the UK Government’s strategic objectives. Thus, there is a disconnect in the translation of funding from the UK Government to devolved institutions and in KE incentivisation for universities cross the UK. Harmonisation of processes and devolved nation representation in the decision-making process surrounding policy and funding would perhaps solve this current disconnect in follow through from policy to action/funding.

Moreover, as previously discussed, there is often a tendency by UK-wide funding bodies to focus on one particular geographical area of the UK at the expense of areas like Scotland. As a result, excellent research potential in Scotland and elsewhere may be overlooked. It should be noted, however, that SFC representatives have made progress in ensuring devolved administrations are recognised, but more should be done to ensure the UK Government and UKRI are aware of world-class R&D opportunities in Scotland. For example, representation on the Ministerial Taskforce from devolved nations has allowed for recognition of excellence in Scottish universities at the same time as their English counterparts, when perhaps in the past the focus has been primarily on R&D in England. UKRI should assess how its representation is distributed across the UK. Currently UKRI is based only in Bristol and Swindon and perhaps the model utilised by Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) could be replicated, whereby regional offices are created across the UK. Additionally, there is the possibility of secondment opportunities at UKRI level to universities across the UK and vice versa for academics to be seconded to UKRI- as discussed previously in this submission. It is also important that the UKRI Board can draw on the talent of all the four UK nations.
 

3. UK Government policy and how it effects universities, students, employees and research in Scotland.

Policy Disconnect

• A lack of harmonisation between UK Government policy and funding and translation to Scotland, as aforementioned, has led to challenges for the Scottish HE sector. It is vital that policy intent is embedded within funding mechanisms. One obvious area of disconnect relates to NIHR public funding for health-related research which tends to be more comprehensive in England than in Scotland.  Given the importance of the health-related research following the pandemic, we should ensure that Scottish-based biomedical research has similar opportunities to those available to English HEIs. The UK Government should ensure that policy and funding decisions made at the top level filter fully through to institutions across the UK. There should be a connectedness between policy and funding, alongside a recognition of differentiation across the UK nations.  If, as a result of the forthcoming spending review, the UK government were to address issues of sustainability around public research funding through the dual support system, it will be important to ensure that there is co-ordinated action to ensure that the whole UK HE research ecosystem can benefit equally.

Funding

• Regarding levels of investment, the Committee will already be aware of the fiscal limitations of the current devolution settlement and the impact this has in terms of facilitating large-scale investment. The University’s Principal Professor Muscatelli provided further analysis on this in his Muscatelli Report but in broad terms, many fiscal powers are reserved and consequently any HE funding in Scotland is determined by Barnett consequentials set by the UK Government.

Levelling-Up

• If levelling-up is to be a key mechanism to tackle economic disparities, then the UK Government should assess how it identifies areas most in need of investment. If there is a lack of representation from these areas, then arguably these areas most in need of ‘levelling-up’ will be bypassed. If the process to encourage levelling-up is a call for funding and application process then this will not solve the problem, instead the Government must ensure it has sufficient representation from across the UK in the bodies and committees responsible for policy decisions and distribution of funding.
• The UK Government should continue to focus on place-based economic strategies to support the ‘levelling-up’ agenda. Existing successful schemes such as the Strength in Places investments could be widened as they allow for academia to collaborate with industry partners and other bodies.

R&D

• The BEIS Research Roadmap announced in July of this year was welcome and provides continued UK Government commitment to work with universities and fund initiatives to further strengthen science, research and innovation across the UK.
• If the Government wants the UK to be a science and research superpower, there must be recognition of expertise across the UK- including in devolved nations. As discussed, increased representation of devolved nations in bodies such as UKRI could allow for the identification of innovative projects and strengths across the UK.
• The UK Government should support challenge-led funding streams. This maintains bottom-up research and supports excellence across the UK, allowing us to leverage key sectors where Scotland and the UK can lead.
• More support for Knowledge Exchange (KE) in Scotland would be welcome, so that Scottish universities are also able to contribute effectively to tackling societal problems. Scotland has a major R&D ecosystem and does not have an issue reaching challenges set out by the UK Government but the lack of harmonisation and differentiation across the UK must be recognised and supported by funding bodies.

Brexit & Immigration

• Brexit will have a significant impact on Scotland’s HE sector. The loss of Horizon Europe and participation in other EU schemes and cross-border projects is concerning for the sector and clarity on the schemes provided by the UK Government to replace these would be welcome.
• Retaining free movement of labour and post-study work visas are vital. The launch of the Government’s R&D roadmap earlier this year was welcome news to the sector with the extension of post-study work visas for PhD students.
• The supply of highly-skilled workers from the EU has been essential for Scottish universities – and indeed for Scottish society as a whole - and this pipeline must be sustained.
• There are concerns for Scottish universities surrounding procurement of essential supplies. For example, a large proportion of medical equipment and consumables is sourced from EU Member States and it is key that the resilience of these supply chains are maintained so that our world-class research and teaching can continue.

October 2020