Written evidence submitted by HM Government (GSH0015)

1. This evidence seeks to describe the current use of horizon scanning in Government, including its effectiveness, how further improvements could be made, and the progress of the implementation of the Jon Day Review recommendations in light of the establishment of the new cross-government horizon scanning programme. The evidence specific to the case studies on 3D printing, autonomous road vehicles and intelligent transport infrastructure, and negative emissions technologies is presented as an Annex to this memorandum.

2. The Government recognises the need for effective strategic thinking and horizon scanning to identify new threats and opportunities. The Government Office for Science Foresight Team and horizon scanning teams in many departments across government already use futures analysis to help tackle complex issues and inform policy making. This Written Memorandum provides a number of examples of horizon scanning in practice across departments and the Devolved Administrations, and describes the work currently underway to help improve the practice of using cross-cutting horizon scanning in Government.

RESPONSE TO THE COMMITTEE’S QUESTIONS

3. The application of horizon scanning across government departments is broad. Horizon scanning is used to help support strategy development, policy making and operational delivery in a variety of ways. The Government also recognises the power of engaging with external stakeholders and experts. Through the use of external challenge, assumptions and implications can be tested in the real world. This includes not just engaging with academia and industry experts but also other governments and international intergovernmental organisations, such as the OECD. The following examples illustrate how government departments have made and are continuing to make use of horizon scanning.

Strategy development

4. At a strategic level, many government departments use horizon scanning to understand the wider context in which they are operating and help them to understand the ‘big picture’, including associated future risks, opportunities, threats and challenges.

5. The application of horizon scanning in government departments supports the central business planning process, where high level long term objectives are set and where corporate level risks can be identified, monitored and where necessary, mitigated against. Many government departments centrally manage their horizon scanning function through a central strategy or strategic analysis team.

6. The Government Office for Science’s Foresight team works across government departments, undertaking a range of futures and horizon scanning projects. The Foresight programme’s key objectives are to inform and influence strategies, policies and priorities for the Government. Their work demonstrates effective collaboration between government departments, academia and industry. Examples of the application of the outputs of this programme include:

a.      The ‘Future of Food and Farming’ (2011) report took a multidisciplinary approach to examine the unsustainable consumption of global natural resources and the ‘hungry billion’ in the global food system. The report is being used by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in support of action to open up global markets, to manage volatility of food prices, to combat and to adapt to the challenges posed by climate change, protecting the world’s resources and biodiversity, and to incorporate sustainable practices in agriculture production, for example, in preparation for Rio +20 and in negotiating the Common Agricultural Policy Reform. The Foresight project’s conclusions on the need for sustainable intensification of agriculture in the UK provided a comprehensive evidence-base for, and endorsement of, the department’s ‘Green Food Project’ which examined how we might increase food production in England, whilst simultaneously enhancing the environment.

b.      The ‘Future of Computer Trading in Financial Markets’ (2012) interim report in 2011 played an influential role in informing the European Commission about the impact that high frequency trading had on financial markets, specifically, in the drafting of the ‘Markets in Financial Instruments Directive’ which will support the development of European regulation;

c.      The ‘Tackling Obesity: Future Choices’ (2007) report has achieved an enduring impact on a number of health sector programmes, including ‘Healthy Weight: Healthy Lives: a cross-government strategy for England’. The Foresight report was also influential in informing the launch of the Department of Health’s 2011 approach to public health and obesity, ‘Healthy Lives, Healthy People: A call to action on obesity in England’ where the Government set national ambitions to achieve a sustained downward trend in the level of excess weight in children by 2020, and a downward trend in the level of excess weight averaged across all adults by 2020. The strategy drew on, among other sources, the models in the Foresight report which projected rates of obesity in 2050 if trends continued unchecked and more recent analysis (2011) which modelled obesity rates in 2030; and

d.      Foresight played a pivotal role in driving the £55 million Government investment in novel diagnostic technologies. Its ‘Infectious Diseases’ (2006) report and subsequent follow up work provided the scientific analysis, business insight, and rationale for the Technology Strategy Board’s ‘Detection and Identification of Infectious Agents Innovation Platform’ in partnership with the Department of Health and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

7. Government departments are often involved in developing joint strategies on security, defence and domestic issues, where they jointly utilise their respective horizon scanning capabilities to help inform the work. Examples include:

a.      The Government’s ‘Industrial Strategy’ is a long term partnership with business, which applies across the whole of Government and gives business the confidence to invest. The partnership between Government and Industry includes the formation of Sector Councils that are co-chaired by Ministers and Industry leaders. Each sector has recently published a strategy document that develops a shared vision for the future of the industry and an action plan to get there. Each Sector Council analysed its sector, paying particular attention to future technologies, skills, and market trends, among others;

b.      The ‘Global Strategic Trends Review’ produced by the Ministry of Defence’s Development, Concepts, and Doctrine Centre. The Review is used to underpin the National Security Strategy and will also be used to inform the Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2015;

c.      In 2011, Government published the ‘White Paper on the Natural Environment’, the first in 20 years. The paper received input from across government, including the use of horizon scanning. The National Ecosystem Assessment, a key piece of horizon scanning-based evidence, played a substantive role in the white paper as it provided an assessment of the UK’s natural environment and a future assessment of how it will change;

d.      Foresight’s ‘Future Flooding’ (2004) significantly influenced the development of the Government’s 20-year strategy for flood risk management ‘Making Space for Water’ (2005), ‘The Pitt Review’ (2008), and the Environment Agency’s ‘Thames Estuary 2100 Plan’ (2012);

e.      The Government Chief Scientific Adviser’s ‘Science and Engineering Assurance Review’ (2011) of the Department for International Development[1] recognised the department’s use of scientific advice in horizon scanning as good practice. The report supported the various sources of (internal and external) advice to horizon scan future, science-related threats and opportunities, including via the Chief Scientific Adviser and his Office, the Chief Economist and his Office, the Senior Research Fellows network and the independent Research Advisory Group, chaired by Professor Sir Leszek Borysiewicz;

f.        The Government’s ‘Active Travel’ work, led by the Department of Transport working closely with the Department of Health, has been developed through regular engagement with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Ministry of Justice, the Department for Education, and the Department for Communities and Local Government; in particular to ensure an ongoing dialogue about all aspects of cycling and wider active travel policy. These discussions have been informed by horizon scanning to consider the technological and economic factors (such as increasing use of electrical vehicles and peak oil) that are likely to shape urban streetscapes over the coming years;

g.      The Pension Commission published three reports between 2004 and 2006 which have been very influential in pensions thinking. The first report of the Pensions Commission set out a detailed and comprehensive analysis of the UK pension system over the long term, which went on to underpin the recommendations made in the second report;

h.      The Horizon Scanning Centre’s report on Technology and Innovation Futures (2012) informed negotiations for the science spend in the Autumn Budget Statement, and the Department of Business, Innovation and Skill’s ‘Eight Great Technologies’ work;

i.         The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affair’s new ‘Evidence Investment Strategy’ is currently being developed and has used an analysis of horizon scanning sources along with input from policy makers, evidence specialists and independent experts to identify key strategic challenges for the department. This will ensure the department’s evidence strategy takes a comprehensive and strategic view of evidence needs, and accounts for emerging opportunities and risks;

j.         The Department of Energy and Climate Change’s ‘Carbon Plan’ is a cross-government assessment which sets out how the UK will achieve decarbonisation within the framework of its energy policy. The plan contains a range of possible future scenarios for the UK, based on analysis of the technical and economic potential of different abatement options. The department’s UK Energy Projects underpin the plan, setting out how we expect energy supply and demand to evolve between now and 2030; and

k.      The Department for Culture, Media and Sport is engaging actively with Ofcom, industry and academics to develop a digital communications infrastructure strategy from 2015 to 2025. In parallel, and contributing to the infrastructure strategy, the department is developing the ‘UK Spectrum Strategy’ to set out how we can achieve best value from use of the radio spectrum to 2025 and beyond.

Policy Making

8. Horizon scanning supports policy making across government departments as it provides a vital function in future proofing policy and making it resilient against future uncertainty. It is common that policy teams and directorates draw on high level strategic pieces of analysis and pursue more in-depth investigations to support particular business needs. Policy level horizon scanning is a well established practice across many departments. For example:

a.      The Department of Health has an evidence-based programme of policies and actions on public health underpinned by an analysis of trends over 20 years. This draws on evidence both at the domestic level and as part of international collaborations, such as with the World Health Organization. The programme, supported by horizon scanning, includes national ambitions to reduce smoking, obesity, physical inactivity, and harmful use of alcohol, with corresponding metrics included in the ‘Public Health Outcomes Framework’ to track progress. In relation to alcohol, for example, the Department of Health has funded the University of Sheffield’s School of Health and Related Research to model the effect of public health interventions. A version of this model has also been endorsed by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

b.      The reports produced by the Pensions Commission made the recommendation for all employees to be automatically enrolled into a workplace pension. The Department for Work and Pensions began the implementation of Automatic Enrolment in 2012;

c.      The Department for Education make use of horizons scanning to help understand demographic, economic and social trends and their implications for the education system. Understanding the external environment affects how many early education school and post-16 places are required, how many teachers are needed and where to build schools. The department has developed models to anticipate and understand future trends. As well as being used for funding purposes, pupil projections help the department to determine teacher numbers and future teacher training needs;

d.      The Department of Energy and Climate Change’s ‘Future of Heating’ plan takes forecasts of likely future heat demand in the UK and considers the different technologies that could meet this demand, and how specific barriers to deployment could be addressed;

e.      In addition to carrying out strategic horizon scanning, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affair’s futures capacity includes policy-level bespoke scanning. For example, the ‘Green Food Project’ used horizon scanning to explore the steps necessary for the UK to achieve a successful green food scenario. The department’s noise team used pre-existing environmental scenarios to identify and evaluate the impact of future drivers of change on the noise environment; and

f.        Foresight’s ‘Mental Capital and Wellbeing’ report was a major driver for the inclusion of mental wellbeing in Medical Research Council’s ‘Research Changes Lives - MRC Strategic Plan 2009-2014’ and set the context for the Assisted Living Innovation Platform being run by Technology Strategy Board. The findings of the report also influenced the Department for Health’s 2011 mental health strategy ‘No Health Without Mental Health: A Cross Government Strategy for England’.

Operational Delivery

9. Horizon scanning supports operational delivery and it plays a highly significant role in departments where there is a strong delivery focus. Through the application of modelling techniques, departments are able to test a number of hypotheses on a particular system as well as having the opportunity to explore interdependencies and their comparative weightings in a variety of situations. Examples of this in practice are set out below:

a.      The Department for Transport uses modelling of population projections with detailed evidence on trips made by different household types for various journey purposes, plus transport costs and efficiency projections to forecast road demand;

b.      The Home Office actively uses horizon scanning to provide advice to law enforcement agencies. For example, it has recently set up a Crime Reduction Hub which will build links with academics, industry and others to analyse crime trends.

c.      The Department for Education uses modelling to produce projections on pupil numbers, future teacher training needs based on economic conditions and to determine specific funding requirements;

d.      The Ministry of Justice has carried out horizon scanning activities to identify the key drivers of civil and family justice workload and used this information to create models to estimate future demand for Ministry of Justice services; and

e.      The Department of Health uses modelling of future scenarios in a number of areas, including using modelling to identify the major risk factors for non-communicable diseases. For example, modelling underpins the Government’s national ambitions to achieve sustained downward trends in overweight and obesity in England. This draws on modelling such as the work by the Government Office for Science (2007) projecting rates of obesity in 2050 and more recent analysis (2011) modelling obesity rates in 2030. Another example is the NHS Health Checks programme (commissioned by Local Authorities) which is based on extensive modelling work undertaken by the department in 2008/9. This modelling has shown that the programme has the potential to detect at least 20,000 cases of diabetes or kidney disease earlier, allowing individuals to better manage and improve quality of life. It could also prevent 1,600 heart attacks and strokes a year. Ongoing horizon scanning for this programme will be taken forward by an expert group set up by Public Health England to advise on scientific developments, research and evaluation needs. 

10. The scope of risk which government needs to monitor over the long term is broad and includes diverse areas of the economy, geopolitics, the environment, public and animal health and society. Many of these risk types are included in the ‘National Risk Assessment and National Security Risk Assessment’. The risks included in the Assessment are informed by robust horizon scanning as part of a base of evidence from which potential likelihoods and impacts can be determined and where necessary, capability work streams are in place to build resilience against these risks materialising. As part of that process, the Government Office for Science, with the support of the Cabinet Office and Ministry of Defence, commissioned the ‘Blackett Review’ (2011) to provide fresh, multi-disciplinary thinking to address the question “How can we ensure that we minimise strategic surprises from high impact low probability risks?” The review used a panel of highly regarded experts from outside Government to present up to date and leading edge thinking and considered how Government could best identify, assess, communicate and quantify the inherent uncertainty in these types of risk. The review identified several recommendations for further strengthening the Government’s approach, including the need for inclusion of external experts and readiness to consider unlikely risks. The report also makes clear that behavioural matters and the role of social science in risk management need to be enhanced.  The Government Office for Science, working with Cabinet Office is taking this forward.

11. All departments have risk management procedures in place which are enforced by management committees (comprising permanent secretaries, director-generals, and non-executive board members). Departments actively undertake horizon scanning to inform risk management and set in place contingency plans against serious risks. The scope of risks which Government needs to monitor over a long period is broad as they cover a number of areas, including economic risk, geopolitical risk, environmental risk, public health/animal health risk, and societal risk. A number examples of the effectiveness of horizon scanning are set out below:

1. Within HM Treasury, horizon scanning forms the basis of senior quarterly discussions with directors and the work of the Treasury’s Economic, Fiscal and Operational Risk Groups. This, in turn, informs performance and risk management discussions between the department’s Executive Management Board and Non-Executive board members. This approach has allowed the Executive Management Board to plan ahead and allocate resource where it is most needed, whilst meeting its budget and headcount reduction targets. This has included building sufficient capability to manage pressures on financial services and Euro area teams; and sufficiently strengthening its spending teams ahead of spending rounds; and

2. Some of the risks included in the National Security Risk Assessment are informed by robust horizon scanning particularly to support assessment of long-term indicative trends and risks over a 20 year time frame and where necessary, capability work-streams are in place to build resilience against these risks materialising.

The Devolved Administrations

12. Within the Devolved Administrations, horizon scanning is being used to underpin new policies and strategies.

13. Northern Ireland’s Department of Enterprise, Trade & Investment has embedded horizon scanning into the region’s economic strategy and it is also increasingly used on a cross-departmental basis to inform new policies and strategies. Between 2008 and 2013, the department, with the support of Northern Ireland’s expert and business-led science industry panel ‘MATRIX’, conducted horizon scanning studies into advanced materials, advanced engineering, agri-food, ICT, life and health sciences, telecoms and sustainable energy. The findings of these reports have been used to inform the Northern Ireland Executive’s ‘Economic Strategy’, the emerging ‘Northern Ireland Innovation Strategy’, the region’s draft ‘Smart Specialisation Strategy’ and sectoral prioritisation plans looking forward to the European Commission’s Horizon 2020. Further examples of horizon scanning in use in Northern Ireland are as follows:

1. The economic development agency, Invest Northern Ireland, now routinely uses the foresight recommendations to prioritise support to business and academia through some of its competitive calls. This is most evident in its Collaborative Networks Programme and increasingly in the selection of sectors to receive support under the Competence Centre Programme.

2. The Department for Employment & Learning uses the foresight outputs to help inform medium to long term skills policy. Universities and Further Education institutes are also engaged in this activity and have revised programmes to meet projected future skills needs. Both Northern Ireland universities also use the foresight outputs to inform research priorities.

3. The Department of Enterprise, Trade & Investment Foresight Unit continues to provide ongoing direct support to help key partners incorporate the findings of foresight studies into their business plans and activities. For example, in 2010 it helped redesign the Invest Northern Ireland Collaborative Networks Programme to reflect regional foresight priorities, and it is currently supporting the agency in the development of enhanced business incubation and acceleration support for the region.

4. Since spring 2013 work has been underway on a further, more detailed ‘Life & Health Sciences Sectoral Strategy’ for the period 2016- 2030. For this, the Department of Enterprise, Trade & Investment Foresight Unit is working closely with the Department for Health, Social Services & Public Safety. The focus is on both economic and wealth creation opportunities and enhanced healthcare and social services for the population as a whole.

14. Looking ahead, early stage scoping has begun on a social innovation Foresight study which will proceed before the end of 2013, and a renewed digital/ICT foresight study is planned for early 2014.

15. Scottish Government officials, supporting Scottish Ministers who are in turn accountable to the Scottish Parliament, undertake work on horizon scanning, where appropriate in close cooperation with their UK Government counterparts and international networks. The Scottish Government’s directorate structure supports the Government’s focus on outcomes and the horizon scanning activity deployed across directorates enables a cross-cutting approach to planning and delivery.

16. The Scottish Government’s Strategy Unit is currently supporting a range of dedicated horizon scanning activities for senior leaders. This leadership programme will be supported by horizon scanning activity to engage children and young people, which will be conducted in collaboration with a range of partners.

17. A new ‘horizons’ network has been established for policy leads engaged in horizon scanning in particular areas and there is ongoing engagement in horizon scanning with strategic partners, using platforms such as the Scottish Futures Group. Officials also support and engage in a number of futures fora facilitated independently.

18. Scottish officials and the Chief Scientific Advisor are particularly active in key areas, for example, Energy and Climate Change Directorate officials leading the Global Forum’s Health and Natural Resources Security theme. Most recently, this involved collaboration with ten other governments to develop scenarios on Eurasian resource interdependencies.

19. The Welsh Government uses horizon scanning to inform a broad range of policy development. Its publication ‘Understanding Wales’ Future’ has been used to inform the development of the Administration’s ‘Programme for Government’. Its work to support key business sector in Wales, particularly, energy and environment, advanced materials and manufacturing, and life sciences, has drawn on horizon scanning information, including EU and UK studies and assessments and, where necessary, studies commissioned by the Administration itself. For example, a Welsh Technology and Innovation Needs Assessment was commissioned in respect of energy and environment to supplement the UK’s Technology Innovation Needs Analysis. Policy development in other areas too draws on horizon scanning; plans for climate change adaption are a case in point.

20. Since 2010, the Knowledge Analytical Service within the Welsh Government has developed a range of knowledge-exchange activities, working with the Economic and Social Research Council and academia. This includes a series of evidence symposia, PhD interns, PhD sponsorship, knowledge-transfer partnership and seminars.

21. From October 2013, the new Public Policy Institute for Wales will be in operation. Its aim is to forge strong new links between high-quality research, wider Welsh civil society and public policy making.

Drawing in new insights through stakeholder engagement

22. Horizon scanning also provides a powerful mechanism for connecting the Government with external stakeholders to understand the changing environment in which they are operating in and to draw in their expertise and knowledge to support internal horizon scanning. Many horizon scanning trends are driven by society and private business so engaging with them in the horizon scanning process also supports the Government’s wider engagement goals. Expert input provides a vital challenge function to help test assumptions and bring in a real world component. For example:

5. Foresight’s Horizon Scanning Centre has expanded the Heads of Horizon Scanning Network to bring public bodies outside of Government together with officials to share best practice in futures and identify opportunities for further collaboration. The Horizon Scanning Centre is also establishing a private sector network to better bring best practice and knowledge transfer from business to government;

6. Foresight’s major projects incorporate substantial stakeholder engagement from government, academia, civil society and industry. They often involve hundreds of leading experts, involved in collecting and analysing evidence that supports the actions of government;

7. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office significantly fund Wilton Park[2] which brings together key decision makers and influencers in international affairs to identify emerging risks and opportunities. Wilton Park hosts conferences that explore and test assumptions around future scenarios. There is an annual Wilton Park conference that explores topics on geographic or thematic futures;

8. The Department for Communities and Local Government recently ran an event where Ministers, staff and partners came together to discuss new ideas and consider ways to improve policies. This year’s programme explored ideas for housing and local economic growth, science and technology, social integration and how to ensure good services are delivered with fewer resources;

9. The Department for Work and Pensions has introduced a series of seminars delivered by high profile speakers who are leading experts in their field, to bring external thinking into the department on some key long term challenges. These include the economy, British social attitudes, housing, disability and youth issues;

10. The Department for Education regularly convenes roundtables with a range of academic and research organisations to share ideas. The department has also delivered a series of seminars bringing in world leading experts to talk to senior officials, advisors and ministers. These talks includes those from Professor Eric Hanushek, a leading expert in the economics of education, Professor Robert Plomin, a leading expert in genetics and education, and Professor Daniel Willingham, a leading expert in the knowledge-based curriculum;

11. The Department of Health commissioned the Centre for Workforce Intelligence to produce a report setting out a 20 year strategic view of the future workforce for health, public health and social care. This work will examine, in so far as possible, social, demographic, economic and technological factors that will impact on the National Health Service in that time period. The Centre for Workforce Intelligence will be working with stakeholders with expertise and a key interest in the future challenges to the National Health Service (and health provision). The key element of this research will be to develop models and plausible scenarios for the future over a 20 year time horizon;

12. The Department for Transport engages with a range of government, industry and academic stakeholders who are typically at the forefront of identifying opportunities and challenges presented by new technologies. A vital function of this engagement is to identify relevant technologies that could be accelerated to market, support innovation in the transport sector and address departmental priorities; and

13. The Department of Energy and Climate Change’s Science Advisory Group is a group of external scientists. It carried out an exercise to consider threats and opportunities facing the department and its scientists and engineers should be doing now to prepare for these. The outputs of this work are being used to inform the department’s emerging ‘Evidence Strategy’.

International Engagement

23. The UK’s leadership in horizon scanning has been recognised by the international community, for example, Singapore and Argentina have held meetings with the Government to learn about horizon scanning and how it is applied. The Government also uses horizon scanning as a basis for international partnership, particularly where there is a shared interest in global/geopolitical risk issues. Monitoring of international horizon scanning programmes can also provide early warning of emerging risk issues which other countries are concerned about.

1. Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have held joint workshops and conferences with foreign governments (including France and the US) on key horizon scanning topics such as resource and climate security;

2. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Department of Business, Innovation and Skill’s Science Innovation Network helped raise awareness about the launch of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment. The assessment was well received by academia and governments in the US and EU member states. This is an example of how horizon scanning can boost the UK’s leadership by demonstrating new ideas and cutting edge thinking;

3. Department of Health and Public Health England undertake international horizon scanning for early warning of emerging pathogens and exotic diseases. Public Health England’s horizon scanning capability can lead to detection of an emerging infection in the UK or in another country which would influence international response through reporting under International Health Regulations and the Early Warning Response System. The Chief Medical Officer brought antimicrobial resistance to international attention through the publication of her horizon scanning report ‘Infections and the rise of antimicrobial resistance’ (2013). This scientific report has led to discussion at the World Health Assembly and the establishment of the World Health Organization Strategic and Technical Advisory Group on antimicrobial resistance;

4. Foreign and Commonwealth Office overseas posts assist departments to gain insight into the current and best thinking overseas, facilitating the reporting of major international conferences such as the Singapore International Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning Symposium 2013. Outputs from these events help domestic horizon scanners to get the most up to date information on global strategic trends and emerging risk and opportunities;

5. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport is supporting work to develop a long term vision for the Ultra-High Frequency radio band. Radio waves do not respect national borders and frequency allocation needs to be agreed internationally to avoid harmful interference. Ofcom is working with European administrations to assess how technological convergence could affect the use of this band in the long term; and

6. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs veterinary and plant health teams coordinate with international centres of excellence for effective surveillance and monitoring of new and emerging threats.

24. Horizon scanning is not about predicting exactly what will happen in the future, but exploring a range of potential future scenarios to better understand uncertainties and ensure that policies are resilient to different future environments and as such there is no hard or fast mechanism to test the effectiveness of its application. Horizon scanning has indeed been done in one form or another for many years, especially in a military and strategic context, to explore trends and the potential impact of low probability, but high impact, events (‘wild cards’ or ‘black swans’). It is not always possible to correctly identify what might happen, but it is often useful to think through the possibilities. This forms the basis, for example, of contingency planning, which has had a number of notable successes in responding to events having previously considered what the appropriate responses would be.

Improving the effectiveness of cross-government horizon scanning

25. In the Civil Service Reform Plan, the Government committed to a cross-government review of horizon scanning capability. The Cabinet Secretary commissioned the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Jon Day, to consider how departments make use of horizon scanning, to assess the capabilities and structures used by the Civil Service to anticipate risk and identify opportunities over the medium-to-long term, and to make recommendations on how best to enable effective, shared strategic analysis across Government on the future challenges facing the UK. The review was published on 21st January 2013.
26. Even during the consultation stage for the review, buy-in from across government departments was strong, for example, a workshop organised by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory was well attended and it considered a variety of different issues surrounding horizon scanning across government, including:

1. Solutions and obstacles to effective horizon scanning
2. The way horizon scanning is (and could be structured)
3. How best to achieve impact and communications

27. The themes of the workshop were taken forward into the Review, including the requirement to improve the relationship with customers of horizon scanning produces, using a common language and communicating horizon scanning more effectively across government, better demonstrating the impact of horizon scanning and promoting accountability, better horizon scanning in government organisations, and introducing a more centralised approach to the coordination of horizon scanning.

28. The Jon Day Review has been well received in government and this is evident by the buy-in from departments at all levels to engage with the new programme. The review created a renewed interest from senior officials in the importance of horizon scanning. Although the review recognised that departments each have their own capabilities in horizon scanning and the examples presented in the first section of this memorandum detail the successful use of horizon scanning across a broad spectrum of government operations, value is now being added to the effectiveness of horizon scanning by implementing the recommendations in the Review to improve sharing the capability between each department and improve the cross-cutting capability overall.

29. The review resulted in the establishment of a new structure for cross-government horizon scanning which aims to improve the commissioning, co-ordination, oversight and quality of outputs. This new cross-government horizon scanning programme, announced in June 2013, builds on the good work that is already being carried out in parts of government by joining up existing work and groups within different departments to maximise capability, commission new work and ensure horizon scanning is linked into policy development at all levels. By bringing departments and experts together, duplication will be reduced and new insights generated.

30. Strategic leadership for the new cross-government horizon scanning programme comes from Jon Day, the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, who reports to the Cabinet Secretary, the senior champion for horizon scanning in government. The establishment of the Cabinet Secretary’s Advisory Group for horizon scanning has underlined the Government’s commitment to improve cross-government capability. The new Advisory Group allows members to collectively consider cross-government findings and key judgements put forward by the communities of interest to help better improve the capability of the Civil Service.

31. Members of the Advisory Group include the permanent secretaries from the Department of Communities and Local Government, Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, Department for Education, HM Treasury, Department for International Development, Department for Work and Pensions, Department of Health, Cabinet Office, Ministry of Defence, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and the National Statistician and the Government Chief Scientist. They are supported by a small Horizon Scanning Secretariat within the Cabinet Office’s Government Innovation Group, which works closely with the Foresight’s Horizon Scanning Centre in the Government Office for Science.

32. The Advisory Group is supported by a second group of senior civil servants at director level, known as the Horizon Scanning Oversight Group, which is chaired by Jon Day. The Oversight Group reports to the Advisory Group and oversees the coordination and outputs of the communities of interest, and identifies gaps in findings and recommends future work to the Advisory Group.

33. Ministerial oversight for the cross-government programme is provided by the Minister for the Cabinet Office, the Minister for Government Policy and the Minister of State for the Cabinet Office. They are informed of the findings from Cabinet Secretary’s Advisory Group meetings and any conclusions or policy recommendations arising. They will also meet periodically to review the programme and to commission further future work where required.

34. Five areas of interest were identified by the Cabinet Secretary Advisory Group at the start of the programme. Communities of interest were established to take forward horizon scanning work, commissioned by the Advisory Group and monitored by the Oversight Group:

1. Emerging Technologies
2. Emerging Economies
3. Changing Supply and Demand of Resources
4. Changing Social Attitudes of Young People
5. Future of Demographic Change in the UK

35. As the programme is relatively new in its formation, it is too early to begin to systematically measure the successful implementation of this new cross-government approach. Early signs indicate that the communities of interest are already bringing together departments that had previously not joined up before and in doing so, increasing the effectiveness of horizon scanning to help inform medium to long term planning.

36. In addition to the newly established horizon scanning programme, there are widespread examples within departments which illustrate senior interest.

1. Following a light touch review of horizon scanning in the Home Office, a senior civil service-level steering group is currently being established to articulate the ‘exam questions’ and provide a route for translating horizon scanning products into policy and or operational impact. It will meet for the first time in October 2013.

2. Within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, plans announced in 2011 by the Foreign Secretary for adjustment and expansion of the department’s overseas network were informed by analysis of expected long term shifts in the balance of global economic and political power. This has resulted in the opening of embassies in South Sudan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Haiti, El Salvador, Somalia, the upgrading of the Political Office in Abidjan (Cote d'Ivoire) to an Embassy, the upgrading of the trade office in Hyderabad, India, to a Deputy High Commission, and the upgrading of the trade offices in Calgary, Canada, and Recife, Brazil to Consulates.

3. Within the Ministry of Defence, regional surveys are submitted to the Defence Strategy Group chaired jointly by the Permanent Secretary and the Chief of the Defence Staff. Since inception in November 2011, the Defence Strategy Group has met 13 times as part of the department’s preparations for the next Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2015. The group considers a range of policy and capability assessments in relation to the strategic context out to 2035. It is planned for these insights to be refined and tested further over the next two years, including through the force development process in Defence. During this period, the Defence Strategy Group is also due to consider sub-Saharan Africa, Russia and South Asia, as well as thematic issues such as the defence contribution to UK influence, regeneration and reconstitution, maritime security, emerging technologies, and future constraints on the use of the Armed Forces.

4. Within the Department of Health, the newly appointed Chief Analyst and Director of Strategy and Quality is promoting greater use of horizon scanning and has engaged the senior leadership team and agencies to identify major trends likely to impact on health and social care system.

5. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affair’s Chief Scientific Adviser and Director of Analysis are promoting the more systematic application of horizon scanning in strategic decision-making processes across the department. For example, to inform the department’s Risk Panel in order to improve strategic planning and risk identification and mitigation.

37. The recent implementation of the Jon Day Review means it is too early to make an assessment and therefore any decisions on further changes to the new operating model’s structures, process and governance. Using the new structure, the Horizon Scanning Secretariat and the Government Office for Science’s Foresight team are increasingly improving their overview of horizon scanning activities across government in order to identify where additional improvements can be made in the long term.

38. Whilst no immediate changes are planned to the current operating model, there are two areas where work is required to help build on the progress made to date to improve the quality of the evidence-base used across government. Firstly, horizon scanning must work in an interdisciplinary way whilst recognising the unique value it brings to capability building, and secondly, a strong skills-base in the cross-government community must be maintained in order to deliver high-quality outputs for departments.

39. It is too early to make a comprehensive assessment as to whether the implementation of the Jon Day recommendations have effectively addressed the gaps identified in the review, especially given the long term nature of horizon scanning. However, through the creation of the new governance structures supported by a central coordination function and the appointment of a senior champion, the framework is now in place to improve the cross-government approach. Although only established at the start of the year, the new programme is working to better coordinate commissioning of long term analyses and, through the central coordination function, working with departments to better present cross-government horizon scanning products to senior stakeholders.

40. Progress is further evident in the fact that all government departments are involved in at least one (and in some cases more) of the cross-government communities of interest for horizon scanning that have so far been established. Through the communities of interest and the Oversight Group, dialogue between departments has improved and there is a greater sharing of insights and analyses, pulled together by Advisory Group commissions and challenges. Through the programme’s new activities, departmental experts are able to convene communities and this is helping to reduce duplication, improve focus and generate a more robust cross-government approach to the delivery of horizon scanning products.

41. There are very strong signs that horizon scanning is increasingly factored into much of government’s analytical work. For instance, the Horizon Scanning Secretariat is based in the Cabinet Office Analysis and Insight team, part of the wider Government Innovation Group. The Analysis and Insight team is home to many economists and social researchers. This encourages a strong linkage between horizon scanning and the social sciences in the planning of new projects and their delivery. Another example is in the Government Office of Science where the science and engineering professions sit which enables links to be made between horizon scanning and the science and engineering work carried out in government organisations.

42. The Government recognises the significance of new technologies for economic growth and national security. The new horizon scanning programme has a specific community of interest on emerging technologies and it currently includes representation from 15 departments and the Devolved Administrations. One of the key challenges relates to global competitiveness. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Technology Strategy Board, UK Trade and Investment, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Department for International Development have all separately undertaken work to explore international comparisons on technology and innovation. Recognising particular technologies raise particular regulatory issues, the community of interest is initiating work to combine these outputs and activities as well as exploring cross-government implications of future policy delivery posed by emerging technologies.

43. Alongside the work of the new horizon scanning programme, the national security community are increasingly undertaking horizon scanning on technology trends to complement their existing geopolitical assessments. A particular interest is in the opportunities from technologies as well as mitigating against the risks technology poses to national security.

44. Examples of departmental-specific action relating to policy or regulatory changes are set out below:

1. The Government has identified ‘Eight Great Technologies’ (Big Data and energy-efficient computing; Satellites and commercial applications of space; Robotics and autonomous systems; Life sciences, genomics and synthetic biology; Regenerative medicine; Agri-science; Advanced materials and nano-technology; Energy and its storage) where the UK has the depth of research expertise and the business capability to develop and exploit them and which will ensure the UK remains economically competitive in the global race. The key policy challenge is ensuring the Government creates the right conditions for research and development in the key technological areas and that this is deployed into products and services which can help expand the economy against rival economies.

2. The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills is working with leadership and special interest groups in each of these eight technology areas where industry and academia come together to create and apply road maps designed to help bring communities together to address barriers and opportunities. It has also invested a further £600 million in new infrastructure and over £200 million in the network of Catapult Centres which will help accelerate commercialisation. The first seven Catapult Centres are now open for business (High Value Manufacturing, Cell Therapy, Offshore Renewable Energy, Satellite Applications, Connected Digital Economy, Future Cities and Transport Systems) with total public and private investment exceeding £1.4 billion over their first 5 years of operation. The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills recently announced £185 million additional funding for the Technology Strategy Board in the Spending Review, 2015-16. Part of this will be used to expand the Catapult network with new Catapults in Energy Systems and Diagnostics for Stratified Medicine.

3. In the field of cyber technology, the Strategic Defence and Security Review (2010) recognised the risk of cyber attack as being one of the four Tier One risks to national security. These risks include hostile attacks from other states, potential shortcomings in the UK’s cyber infrastructure, and the actions of cyber terrorists and criminals. It assesses that these threats will increase significantly over the next 5 to 10 years as our dependence on cyberspace continues to deepen. The National Cyber Security Programme aims to close the gap between the requirements of a modern digital economy and the rapidly growing risks associated with cyberspace. This programme is supported by £650 million of investment from the Cabinet Office, over the years 2011-15. The Ministry of Defence element of this programme is £90M over the 4 years, which is used to fund the Defence Cyber Security Programme. The Defence Cyber Security Programme has four strands: Shaping Cyber, Creating and Retaining Talent, Creating an Agile and Resilient Cyber Defence, and Building a Cyber Force. The Senior Responsible Owner is Director Cyber, Intelligence and Information Integration (within Defence Intelligence which is itself within Joint Forces Command).

4. The challenges posed by drones and the growth of the remotely piloted part of the aviation sector and the need to support the further development of associated technologies. The overall objective of the Government and also the European Commission is to enable the full and safe integration of Remotely Piloted Aircraft into the total aviation system, sharing the same airspace as their manned counterparts.  The UK is actively contributing to the development of harmonised, international Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems regulations. The International Civil Aviation Organisation is currently developing Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems guidance material, due for publication in autumn 2014, with standards expected about two years later. The European Commission’s Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Roadmap was published in June 2013. This sets out the milestones and timing aimed at an incremental integration of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems into European airspace from 2016, with the publication of Implementing Rules for operations, personnel licensing and certification from 2018 onwards.

October 2013

ANNEX A: CASE STUDY – 3D PRINTING

1. Additive manufacturing, often referred to as 3D printing, is the process of manufacturing a 3D object from a digital file by adding material layer by layer in the exact shape. This has several advantages over more traditional ‘subtractive’ manufacturing techniques, including much lower levels of waste material, vastly reduced tooling costs, and the ability to produce at very low volumes.  Additionally, the process enables designers to design for functionality and aesthetics without having to consider the ‘manufacturability’ of the shape in the design.
    
2. Additive Manufacturing (AM) is not a single technology, but is built on a range of technologies, and is largely the legacy of prototyping and modelling systems.  As the underlying technologies have existed in different forms (and under different names) for many years, it is difficult to pinpoint the birth of 3D printing precisely, but 3D printing from a computer design was demonstrated at least as early as 1984[3]. The September 2012 report of the Additive Manufacturing Special Interest Group (AMSIG), ‘Shaping our National Competency in Additive Manufacturing’[4] described seven broad classifications for Additive Manufacturing technologies, each of which encompasses a range of different processes and materials. Each of these seven Additive Manufacturing technologies has different strengths and weaknesses, for instance different rates of material deposition, different resolutions, and different material properties.

3. Currently, the aerospace & defence, healthcare, creative industries and motorsport sectors are most active in use of Additive Manufacturing technology in the UK, but with examples of use in other sectors such as automotive, and energy generation.

4. At the moment, the creation of 3D designed and printed products is limited to a relatively small number of researchers (both public and private sector), experts, and enthusiastic early adopters, as it requires sophisticated design software, and relatively expensive 3D printing machines and materials. In 2011, the Additive Manufacturing industry worldwide including machine tools, materials sales and associated services, was valued at $1.9billion. However, with 3D printers available on the open market and prices falling, the sector has enjoyed sustained double digit growth in recent years, for instance, seeing almost 30% compound growth in 2011[5].  A recent McKinsey report found that the global market for 'additive manufactured' products is expected to reach US$100 billion by 2020.[6]

5. The policy challenges presented by Additive Manufacturing will not manifest fully until it achieves much greater market penetration, with associated changes to consumer and business behaviours as set out below.

Defence and Security Challenges

6. The Home Office are concerned that 3D printing presents new ways of enabling crime. Among the potential areas of concern are the 3D printing of weapons, the printing of security keys for devices like handcuffs and the consequences for IP theft. These are all being actively monitored. The Home Office has also been concentrating on the operational impact of this technology.
    
7. The Ministry of Defence’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory considers that a broader range of countries or even non-state actors will, in time, be able to manufacture sophisticated equipment of relevance to defence. This will reduce further the historical advantages enjoyed by countries with capabilities to manufacture sophisticated equipment at scale.
    
8. In terms of defence logistics and procurement, there are opportunities for major cost savings.  It is expensive to deploy adequate and complete stocks of spares into theatre or on a ship. Ministry of Defence stock holdings are extensive, but a vehicle or other system might still need to be taken out of service for longer than desired while waiting for a part. A flexible manufacturing facility that incorporates 3D printing may help plug that gap, increasing capital utilisation.
    
9. Additive manufacturing is suited to production runs of tens or hundreds of items, not thousands. This will pose a challenge to defence logistical and procurement optimisation. The optimum stocking levels and batch purchasing/production approach may become very different through the new technology.

10. Very different options for obsolescence management become viable. This may encourage longer-lived equipment with many upgrades/versions.

11. In the life cycle of a new defence product, the transition from Technology Readiness Level 6 (full Lab demonstrator) to TRL 7 (early production) is particularly tricky. This step tends to be fraught; design and construction approaches adopted at TRL 6 can prove non-viable in production at TRL 7, leading to redesigns which bring new problems and risks. With additive manufacturing techniques, it becomes feasible effectively to demonstrate at TRL 7 and skip TRL 6.  This will substantially reduce costs and delays when eventual productions runs are hundreds or less.

Business and Economic Challenges

12. AM has the potential to play an important role in the future of the UK’s high value manufacturing economy, with opportunities to increase the global competitiveness of UK manufacturing in a number of ways.

13. Because it involves much less waste, Additive Manufacturing can help existing UK manufacturing business improve resource efficiency and mitigate risks of scarcity of materials, energy and water. This could also assist UK businesses in meeting carbon reduction and other environmental obligations. Additive Manufacturing can also contribute to business competitiveness through producing existing parts in more cost effective ways, and through driving process innovation.

14. Additive Manufacturing can enable the creation of innovative new products through combining materials and ideas in new ways without ‘manufacturability’ constraints.  This is an area where the UK could take a lead building on our strengths in design and manufacture of high value, niche products.

15. Additive Manufacturing can reduce barriers to entry into small scale manufacturing production.  An IBM study[7] has predicted that manufacturing supply chains will become more in-country and production less global. Industry will build in smaller batches with more local customisation. Industry will tend to become ‘smaller’, with many medium sized players rather than a few big ones. The combination of the range of possible new products with such reduced barriers to entry could see rapid growth of small scale entrepreneurial UK manufacturing businesses designing and producing personalised and bespoke products and related services, responsive to changing customer needs. However, the highly automated nature of Additive Manufacturing means that such growth would be unlikely to translate into large numbers of new manufacturing jobs.

16. One of the most disruptive aspects of Additive Manufacturing is likely to be the rise of ‘consumer production’ and in parallel the potential development of new and sometimes disruptive business models. The ongoing transition of the music industry away from buying CDs and towards consumers creating, downloading and sharing music online provides one example of what might happen.  If large numbers of consumers are able to easily print their own consumer electronic devices or other consumer goods through sharing designs online, this will shift value creation in such sectors away from design and production and towards business models which capture value through putting designers and consumers in touch with each other (cf Apple ‘app store’). Such a shift would produce significant issues around IP enforcement in regard to designs, and issues around enforcement of regulations and standards for the materials involved. (If a home-printed spare part fails or even causes harm, who has liability?)

17. In the long term, there will be changes to the structure of the UK and global economies. It could affect the transport and logistics industry as there will be less need to transport goods across the world, and as with the rise of online shopping, there is the potential for disruptive change to the retail industry.

Technological Challenges

18. The UK has a well-established and equipped Additive Manufacturing research community, and is one of the world’s leading sources of AM related knowledge and research, alongside Germany and the USA. However, despite the maturity of the research community which includes 24 universities and 57 companies, with average engagement of a decade or more on Additive Manufacturing, there are still significant technical challenges to overcome to achieve the full potential commercial value of this range of technologies.

19. The AMSIG found that current barriers to commercial application included costs, quality, the range of materials, and sizes of components which can be produced.  In addition, the UK Additive Manufacturing supply chain was found to be weak and fragmented.

20. The UK will need to address such technical commercialisation challenges if we are not to see additive manufacturing fall into the ‘valley of death’ which the Science and Technology Select Committee has previously studied.

Defence and Security

21. The Ministry of Defence’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory Horizon Scanning programme identified 3D printing as a significant emerging technology several years ago. The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory brought together colleagues across the Ministry of Defence, wider Government, industry and academia to consider potential defence and security implications.  Defence Science and Technology Laboratory commissioned proof-of-concept studies through the Centre of Defence Enterprise into several different aspects of 3D printing including the printing of electronics, advanced materials and energetic materials (e.g. explosives or propellants).  Defence Science and Technology Laboratory now uses 3D printing to produce niche components used in support of specific Defence and Security projects.

22. The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory has studied the likely impact of additive manufacturing on Ministry of Defence logistics.  Defence Science and Technology Laboratory is currently researching its wider Defence and Security impact, working closely with Universities and those parts of UK industry that are already exploiting additive manufacturing and expect that use to grow, especially defence and aerospace. Defence Science and Technology Laboratory has provided simple briefing material on 3D printing to wider government including various policing organisations.

23. The Home Office also identified the challenges of this new technology several years ago through routine futures work. Horizon scanning activity is continuing and focusing on the availability and viability of new materials for 3D printing with thermal and mechanical properties better suited to the manufacture of weapons and other threats.

Business and the Economy

24. The Government Office for Science Foresight unit first identified some of the potential opportunities and challenges of 3D printing in its 2010 Sigma Scan paper From Ink-Jet Printing to Personal Fabrication[8].

25. The Foresight Future of Manufacturing project, being led by the Government Office for Science, is using the best available science and evidence to identify important changes facing the UK manufacturing sector, looking ahead to 2050.  This evidence is being used to provide advice for policy makers, including the sponsor Minister Vince Cable MP, and this process has highlighted the opportunities and disruptive possibilities of additive manufacturing (although as just one of a range of technological, social, environmental and economic changes relevant to manufacturing). The final report is still being finalised and will be published along with supporting evidence in October 2013.

26. The Intellectual Property Office has recently undertaken a horizon-scanning exercise to ensure that policy making services are ready to respond to, and engage with, future challenges and opportunities such as 3D printing. This exercise was carried out as a precursor to business planning and was facilitated by Foresight.  The exercise analysed the key drivers and the Intellectual Property Office will integrate horizon scanning into its policy development processes.

27. The Patent Informatics Team at the Intellectual Property Office has been investigating worldwide patenting activity for 3D printing.  The final report will be issued by the end of November and highlight the activities of the UK on the global stage, as well as identifying companies, individuals or universities with large patent portfolios in this area.  The degree of collaboration between major holders of large patent portfolios will also be reviewed.  This project could contribute to the evidence base for potential policy in this area and identify prospective new avenues for research.

28. The Intellectual Property Office ran a competition with the Technology Strategy Board under the Small Business Research Initiative on ‘How can new technology assist the growth in legitimate markets, whilst reducing markedly the accessibility of infringing products online?’ One entry included 3D Printing and its intellectual property enforcement issues; the Intellectual Property Office is considering these implications.

29. The Intellectual Property Office is also commissioning research examining the role intellectual property plays in consumer use of 3D printing. The Intellectual Property Office research will report in Spring 2014 and provide further economic evidence to inform policy making in this area.  A working group has been set up with representation from across Intellectual Property Office to inform this research and share information.

Technology Commercialisation

30. The Technology Strategy Board’s study ‘A Landscape for the Future of High Value Manufacturing in the UK’ (February 2012), identified Additive Manufacturing as one of twenty two priority technologies which the UK needs to develop to enable business to respond to global trends and challenges.  This was reinforced in their High Value Manufacturing Strategy, published May 2012.

31. In October 2011, the Technology Strategy Board established an Additive Manufacturing Special Interest Group (AM SIG) which conducted a Technology Innovation Needs Analysis (TINA) on AM.  The TINA involved structured consultation with key Additive Manufacturing supply chain businesses and leading academics, as well as a review of industry and research activity since 2007. The resulting September 2012 report has identified the barriers to further commercial technology adoption in the UK, and the UK’s capability.

Defence and Security

32. The work described above to understand the threats and opportunities of this technology means that the Government is prepared to react to the challenges which may arise.

33. For example, the Home Office has been working with partner law enforcement agencies both nationally and internationally to monitor and evaluate emerging threats and opportunities. This work has led to the Home Office to acquire 3D printing capability within its Centre for Applied Science and Technology (CAST).

Case Study example: Printed firearms

34. Through collaboration nationally with Department for Transport, Metropolitan Police, SOCA and the Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure and internationally with US Department of Homeland Security and the Technology Directorate of the Counter Terror Technology Support Office the threat of the technology to ‘print’ a viable firearm was identified.

35. Although the manufacture of a firearm was covered by existing legislation (the Firearms Act 1968), there were specific new operational threats that required evaluation. In particular the need to verify the viability of a ‘printed’ firearm and its ability to evade existing security screening technology.

36. Whilst the technology was being evaluated there was a report from the USA of a firearm having been printed. Since the Home Office had identified the future threat and established its own capability it was able to respond effectively to this event. In particular, the Home Office, via its CAST department, was able to rapidly advise on the ability of current security screening equipment to detect these weapons and to repeat the manufacture process and subsequently test-fire the weapon to establish the current viability of the approach.

37. Knowledge generated through testing has been disseminated via established channels to interested departments and law enforcement.

Business and the Economy

38. Given the opportunities which additive manufacturing presents to entrepreneurial new businesses, the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills funded Manufacturing Advisory Service (MAS) is playing an important role in helping SME manufacturers understand the challenges and exploit the opportunities of the technology, particularly in rapid prototyping, concept evaluation and bespoke manufacturing. This has included demonstrating 3D printing at a series of best practice workshops for SMEs to raise awareness and providing support and advice to stimulate new thinking and facilitate action in firms.

39. Specific examples of how MAS support has helped firms apply 3D technology to develop new manufacturing concepts, drive innovative design and get better products to market more quickly, include:

• helping a furniture maker evaluate how a similar timber focussed flexible rapid manufacturing process could help their business ;
• designing a clip to help manage cables under steel conduit; and
• grant-funding a rapid prototype high-end stylist hairbrush that has received strong feedback and is expected to go to market in the US soon.

40. The Government will continue to review the policy implications for business growth as the research outlined above by the Intellectual Property Office and Foresight reports later this year and early 2014.

Technology Commercialisation

41. Following an extensive dialogue with industry, the Government announced its conclusions of a Growth Review for Advanced Manufacturing on 23 March 2011.  This included a range of actions to ensure the UK is making the most of opportunities to commercialise new technologies, including funding 12 new university-based Centres for Innovative Manufacturing through the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

42. Launched in April 2011, the Centre for Innovative Manufacturing in Additive Manufacturing led by the Universities of Nottingham and Loughborough with 15 industrial partners was one of the new centres, receiving five years of funding.  This Centre is undertaking new early stage research into multi-material and multi-functional devices which can combine electrical, optical and structural properties.

43. The Advanced Manufacturing Growth Review also saw the Government commit to launching the High Value Manufacturing Catapult centre which opened in autumn 2011, to bring new manufacturing technologies to market. The Catapult, funded through the Technology Strategy Board, brings together seven centres with expertise across all forms of manufacture using metals and composites, process manufacturing technologies and bio-processing. A number of the centres have expertise in additive manufacturing and are undertaking collaborative R&D projects with industry examining commercialisation challenges in aerospace, motor sport and medical devices.

44. Following the September 2012 AM SIG report, the Technology Strategy Board also developed a competition for innovation funding ‘New Design Freedoms in Additive Layer Manufacturing’. This £7m investment in AM was co-funded by the EPSRC, the Arts and Humanities Research Council, as well as the Economic and Social Research Council, and was aimed at accelerating commercial adoption across a wide range of industry sectors from aerospace to jewellery to medical implants.  The extremely strong field of submissions prompted the Technology Strategy Board to increase its funding by 50%, and over £9m of grant funding was awarded to 18 projects in June 2013, which seek to address the barriers to greater commercialisation of the technology.

ANNEX B: CASE STUDY – AUTONOMOUS ROAD VEHICLES AND INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

1. New technologies have the potential to revolutionise how we travel, reducing the financial and environmental costs, making journeys easier and quicker, and providing timely data to allow transport users to make informed decisions. The Department for Transport wants to position the UK at the forefront of the change. Recent publications, such as the roads command paper ‘Action for Roads’ and the ‘Rail Technical Strategy’, both highlight the ways in which technological developments have the potential to transform road and rail travel and support the delivery of policy outcomes.

2. The UK is a world leader in intelligent transport systems (ITS), whereby new technologies are applied to achieve innovations in vehicles and traffic management. Part of Government’s role is to maximise the potential benefits to UK industry in this area, which is well-placed to take a global lead in their development. The Department therefore works closely with relevant industry organisations to ensure that Government and industry activities are closely aligned.

3. Broadly, there are three main policy challenges for the Department relating to new and emerging technologies:

1. Understanding current, emerging and future developments and assessing the implications for policy and operations, including: The scope and range of technologies and applications; the varying rates of development; evidence on costs and benefits; and understanding where Government can add value.
    
2. Supporting and incentivising industry to develop innovative solutions: This involves engaging with stakeholders, encouraging and facilitating join-up across multiple industry sectors (e.g. transport, ICT), and collaborating internationally (especially at European level) on research, standards, regulation etc.
    
3. Supporting UK economic growth by tackling barriers to development and commercialisation of effective new technologies, and enabling deployment in a way that is legal, safe, ethical and cost-effective.

4. The policy issues and challenges are identified through a range of engagement mechanisms with partners and stakeholders, and through research and evidence-gathering.

Government research and horizon scanning

5. A key report that examined the challenges and opportunities for the UK in bringing ‘intelligence’ into its infrastructure was published by the Office of Science & Technology in 2006. The report explored how science and technology could be applied to the design and implementation of intelligent infrastructure for robust, sustainable and safe transport and its alternatives. The Department for Transport and the Highways Agency have also commissioned a range of research and analysis to support our understanding of intelligent transport infrastructure.

International engagement on policy, standards, regulations and research

6. The UK works directly with the European Commission and Member States, particularly through the EU Intelligent Transport Systems Committee, established under the EU ITS Directive. The Highways Agency is also engaged with the ERA-NET ROAD II initiative, which aims to strengthen the European Research Area in road research by coordinating national and regional road research programmes and policies.

7. There are a range of European-wide initiatives that we are engaged in but of particular relevance is ERTICO, the network of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services stakeholders in Europe. It facilitates the safe, secure, clean, efficient and comfortable mobility of people and goods in Europe through the widespread deployment of ITS.

Engagement with relevant industry sectors and experts

8. The Department for Transport is funding the Enabling Innovation Team, a new initiative hosted by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) to help innovators find routes to market. The Department also works with the Technology Strategy Board and in particular, provides funding to the Transport Systems Catapult, which is one of a network of technology and innovation centres established by the Technology Strategy Board to support industry in finding innovative solutions to transport challenges.

9. We participate in the Transport Knowledge Transfer Network (KTN), supported by the Technology Strategy Board, which is a forum for stimulating innovation through knowledge transfer. The Department also participates in the Automotive Council’s Intelligent Mobility Working Group and both the Department for Transport and HA sit on the ITS (UK) Council and engage in relevant interest groups. We also have good links with the infrastructure supply chain and the transport modelling community.

10. We also have established relationships with the key interest groups representing motorists (AA, RAC Foundation, RAC Motoring Services), logistics (Freight Transport Association, Road Haulage Association) and businesses (e.g. CBI, Federation of Small Businesses, British Chambers of Commerce), and these types of relationships exist with the other transport sectors.

Independent advice from the scientific community and from industry

11. A range of reports have been produced over recent years that have informed our thinking, including those by the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, the Automotive Council, the Royal Academy of Engineering, and the Council for Science and Technology. Other important sources of expertise and advice are the UK Research Councils, the Universities’ Transport Study Group, the Rail Research Association UK, university transport groups (e.g. transport Newcastle at Newcastle University), the Institution of Engineering and Technology, and the Institution of Civil Engineers.

12. The Department for Transport is now in the process of establishing a work programme to further develop and improve the Department’s technology horizon scanning capabilities. This will include a formal, structured technology watch function to ensure that relevant new and emerging technologies are effectively identified, and their potential implications for transport are understood.

Autonomous vehicles

13. The policy challenges of these advanced systems focus mainly upon the national and international construction standards for new vehicles, and the rules that apply to drivers and the responsibilities of using a vehicle on the road on the roads in the UK. An overview of the Department for Transport’s definition of autonomous vehicles is provided at the end of this case study.

14. The technologies that underpin autonomous vehicles have been evolving for many years across a range of discrete vehicle-based areas, and with many manufacturers and technology suppliers. Government’s role is not to set the direction in these areas but to ensure that the research and development community along with the vehicle manufacturers have the flexibility to develop products for the market, and to do this in a way that stimulates opportunity while simultaneously removing obstacles such as unnecessary or burdensome regulation.

15. The Government also has a role to protect the public and road users where appropriate. The national and international regulatory frameworks for road vehicle regulation have worked successfully for many years to provide the right balance between risk and burden for new vehicles. The Department for Transport’s relationships with the technology leaders in these areas provides the best opportunity to understand the technologies being developed and to translate this knowledge into policy decisions and outcomes.

16. Road vehicles are subject to two different control measures, the first applies to the new vehicle performance with respect to safety and environmental issues and the second to their use on public roads.

17. As a product that crosses national boundaries, produced by a global industry, road vehicles are subject to legislative measures that are agreed in an international context. This is generally helpful to manufacturers as greater harmonisation of requirements across markets can deliver production and administrative burden savings.

18. The emergence of automated functions on vehicles has raised new challenges in setting performance requirements. Some governments have concerns that these technologies introduce legal uncertainty with regard to who is responsible for the actions of the vehicle when operating autonomously. In particular, a concern has been raised regarding the legal responsibility of the State for any adverse consequences of permitting such use. This concern has the effect that some countries position themselves conservatively when considering regulatory change.

19. Performance standards, in so far as they affect safety systems, are dictated in the European Community by EC legislation. Increasingly, however, these standards are developed under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and adopted by the European Community and a wider international community.

20. The UK has a leadership role in this process having both a position as the nominated representative for Europe to chair the Administrative Committee responsible for globally harmonised vehicle regulations and, separately, as chair of the Technical Committee responsible for the regulatory proposals that will affect autonomous vehicle technology moving forward.

21. We have been actively involved in the development of vehicle standards for many years during which time we have established a professional relationship with stakeholders from the vehicle manufacturing sector and also with manufacturers in the automotive supply chain.

22. We hold stakeholder meetings prior to the principal UNECE meetings that help both inform our policy development but also establish key contacts between officials and the manufacturing sector. From a position of trust the Department is kept abreast of emerging technology and consulted on possible barriers to adoption.

23. Our contribution and leadership has influenced the outcome of the regulatory initiatives that address the technologies that would be described as ‘partial’ automation and we are forging alliances with manufacturing interests that will keep us well positioned for the discussions that will emerge on ‘highly’ and ‘fully’ autonomous vehicles.

24. One common principle regarding vehicle use is that the driver is responsible for the vehicle when it is on public roads and is liable for any offences that are committed. Current legislation (national and international) is framed in the context that the driver will be in control at all times but, increasingly, the driver will release control to the vehicle.

25. From a European perspective the free movement of vehicles between countries is facilitated through the Vienna Convention (last amended in 1972). Article 8 of the Convention requires that “Every driver shall at all times be able to control his vehicle…” It is likely that when the convention was adopted in 1968 this wording was appropriate for the vehicles of the day, and those involved could not have foreseen the advances in technology that is increasingly commonplace today.

26. For those countries across Europe who are bound by the terms of the Convention, this Article 8 condition is creating potential difficulties for the deployment of advanced vehicle systems. The relevant committees of the UNECE that administer the Convention are reviewing the provisions with the purpose of recognising the current levels of autonomy and to find a solution to avoid further difficulties as highly autonomous vehicles enter the marketplace.

27. The Department for Transport has been liaising with Oxford University who are developing a technology for a highly autonomous vehicle (where the driver would be expected to be ready to take back control); the meaning of to “be in control” was significant to the advice that was provided. Our view was that, in a vehicle that had the capability to navigate itself but also alert the driver when it needed to cede back control, provided the driver was suitably positioned in the vehicle to take back control, and alert to the need to do so, autonomous operation appeared to meet the legal requirements.

28. For the next steps in the evolution of autonomous vehicles, the Department for Transport is in the process of commissioning a feasibility study regarding the use of trucks in ‘platoon’, i.e. where one or more trucks closely follow a lead vehicle and their braking, acceleration and steering functions are dictated by the lead vehicle.

29. The UK is recognised for its use of evidence in its negotiation and for our pragmatic approach of light touch regulation, ensuring the provision of road safety that society might expect of government while providing industry the maximum flexibility with which to innovate and grow.

30. Our evidence was for many years established through independent research. Today our evidence base is developed increasingly from technical information provided by manufacturers and from published work, including that of the European Commission. Our prominent role in international activities and our professional relationship with the industrial sector are increasingly important factors in our ability to deliver government policy.

Intelligent transport infrastructure

31. For the purpose of responding to this inquiry, intelligent transport infrastructure is assumed to refer to designing infrastructure that can respond autonomously and intelligently to external stimuli to improve travel efficiency and safety. It encompasses a range of technologies and three examples are provided to illustrate this.

Managed motorways

32. A managed motorway scheme enables the hard shoulder to be used as a running lane through the provision of technology and emergency refuge areas. The technology is used by regional control centres to monitor and control traffic and provide information to road users. Managed motorways provide additional capacity with a 40-60 per cent cost saving compared with motorway widening schemes.

33. The concept of managed motorways was borne from the vision of ‘Smart Highways’, set out in a Highways Agency strategy published in 1999, ‘Strategic Roads 2010’. This set the scene for driving technology research and development, seeking solutions to combine existing and emerging technologies, delivering a more flexible road-space. Technologies were developed which are now commonplace, not only on England’s roads but across the UK. Examples include improved signalling systems such as the Advanced Motorway Indicators, and a new digital speed enforcement camera system, improving traffic flow whilst maintaining safety.

34. The first managed motorway pilot took place on the M42 in 2006 and in 2009 the Secretary of State for Transport committed a significant investment to the delivery of 14 hard shoulder running schemes. The Highways Agency established a project to produce an applied medium-term foresighting report relating to managed motorways to inform current and future delivery work. The project looked up to 10–15 years ahead and used scenario based planning techniques to consider possible external factors and how they could impact on future delivery requirements in the areas of safety, technology, operations and user requirements.

35. From an aspiration of reducing the visual impact to the driver, whilst maintaining the right level of information to ensure safe operation, the Highways Agency has planned, researched and developed the concept piloted on the M42 into a new design (published in 2012) of ‘all-lanes running’. In this situation there is no hard shoulder and there is reduced numbers of signs and signals. This achieves the same levels of safety, reduces capital and operational costs and maintains a high level of service to the road user.

36. The visioning conducted by the Highways Agency showed that ‘cooperative vehicles’ are the way forward. As a result, the Highways Agency is developing a data feed for signs and signals, including in a managed motorway domain, to provide information into vehicles. Cooperative vehicle highway systems of the future are being developed by the automotive industry and communications industry which will rely on vehicles communicating with the infrastructure. As a network operator it is essential that the Highways Agency’s data is of the right quality and is provided in a timely manner to continue the safe operation of the network, even though information and control maybe within the vehicle. The Agency is preparing for just this outcome.

Urban traffic management and control

37. The Department for Transport initiated the Urban Traffic Management and Control (UTMC) programme in 1997 in order to help urban local authorities in the development of a more open approach to the use of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) in urban areas. The UTMC initiative represents one of the most successful transfers of research to deployment in the ITS world. It has transformed the ITS marketplace in the UK and overseas over the past few years. The aim of this programme was to recognise the potential value that mainstream information and communications technologies could have in traffic management, in order to integrate ITS solutions to deliver an increasing range of policy objectives.

38. The heart of UTMC is the open Technical Specification, developed collaboratively by suppliers and authorities under the authority of an independent professional secretariat. This ensures that it meets user needs while being practical for developers to support and – crucially – ensures that different suppliers know how to connect to each other’s products. New elements of UTMC are continually being created to meet today’s challenges. Intelligent transport systems can be deployed individually, but greater benefits can be gained by integrating them into a unified system. UTMC allows integration of these systems to provide a cost effective and flexible means to manage transport in urban areas.

39. European-led initiatives in traffic management are very important and UTMC has taken serious interest in these areas. In 2012, the European Commission launched Project POSSE (‘Promotion of Open Specifications and Standards in Europe’) under the INTERREG IVC programme. The POSSE project is led by Reading Borough Council, and enables the sharing of experiences from UK and German open specification frameworks with roads authorities in a number of Member States (Czech Republic, Italy, Lithuania, Norway and Spain). UTMC is a full project partner in POSSE, and the Department for Transport is providing the national co-financing necessary.

Remote condition monitoring

40. Network Rail is responsible for rail infrastructure maintenance policy, responding to the High Level Output Specification issued by the Department for Transport for each five year Control Period. The Department for Transport issued its Rail Technical Strategy (RTS) in 2007 where improved remote condition monitoring was considered as a key element for Network Rail to move from a “Find and Fix” to “Predict and Prevent” attitude to maintenance and improvements to reliability and safety.

41. The new Rail Technical Strategy, referenced earlier, identifies remote condition monitoring as a key enabler for future intelligent infrastructure maintenance. Network Rail subsequently published its own Technical Strategy embracing such new technology, including real time monitoring of structures and earthworks and increasing the use of on-train systems enabling trains to monitor the infrastructure and infrastructure systems to monitor trains. The development of this Strategy shows the commitment across the industry to ensure new technology plays a core role in future rail systems.

Overview of autonomous vehicles

42. The application of electronic control of safety systems on road vehicles has advanced rapidly over the last three decades as computing power has increased and costs have fallen. This has created the opportunity for the vehicle to support, and in some cases overrule, the driver during safety critical events, and can be seen as the first step towards autonomy of road vehicles.

43. There is no recognised or agreed definition of an autonomous vehicle but it is generally accepted that it will comprise a number of levels extending from driver support systems through to full and complete vehicle control. Systems at the lower level could include technology such as anti-lock braking or electronic stability control. These systems deduce safety risk based upon the behaviour of the vehicle (e.g. wheel lock during braking) and introduce a correction that can, in some cases, countermand the driver’s input.

44. More recent developments include systems that have an awareness of their surroundings through the use of cameras, RADAR or LIDAR technology. These systems can intervene with the braking, steering, headway and/or speed control of the vehicle with no input from the driver. Advanced emergency braking, lane keep assist, and advanced intelligent cruise control are examples of systems in use today.

45. The natural progression of technology suggests that these systems will progressively develop to function in combination, providing opportunities for network capacity improvement and reductions in road casualties, fuel consumption and pollutant emission. These levels of autonomy may be seen as partial automation as the driver retains primary responsibility for the vehicle and its operation.

46. High or full automation is the level at which the vehicle has the intelligence to navigate a selected route without driver input. The distinction between ‘high’ and ‘full’ automation would be that in the former the driver must be able and ready to take back control of the vehicle whereas in the latter case there would be no expectation that a driver would be available to control the vehicle.

ANNEX C: CASE STUDY – Negative Emissions Technologies

1. Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs) are in fact a broad range of proposed technologies intended to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. They include large scale engineering approaches using either chemical or physical processes to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and biologically based methods which aim to simulate or enhance natural carbon storage processes, The Royal Society, in its 2009 report, stated (of all geoengineering technologies, not just NETs) “None of the methods assessed offers an immediate solution to climate change and too little is understood about their potential future effectiveness, risks and uncertainties to justify reducing present and future efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” NETS pose four main policy challenges:

1. A lack of evidence about their effectiveness, cost and environmental effects;
2. A risk that despite this lack of evidence they may be promoted by their advocates to such an extent that they may cause complacency amongst policy makers, who will then address the fundamental need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with less urgency;
3. A risk that some organisation or country may “go it alone” to the detriment of others;
4. A risk that R&D to test effectiveness, feasibility and environmental effects of new techniques will be prevented by over-cautious application of the precautionary approach under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

2. These challenges have been identified from a very wide range of sources. Several of the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s staff, particularly members of the science and engineering teams, monitor research on NETs. They have liaised with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and , Department of Business, Innovation and Skills and met with representatives of, or are otherwise following, the work of numerous research programmes and institutions e.g. SPICE, VIRGIN Earth Challenge, IAGP, Oxford University and the Royal Society.

3. The Department of Energy and Climate Change has itself commissioned work from its contractors at the Met Office Hadley Centre, who have worked with the NERC to produce a report “A Forward Look for UK Research on climate impacts of geoengineering”. This includes consideration of NETS.

4. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has been tasked with considering geoengineering within its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), currently nearing completion. The Government, led by the Department of Energy and Climate Change staff, is fully engaged with the IPCC process, and welcomes the inclusion of consideration of NETs in the AR5. This is an important step forward in understanding the challenges posed by NETS.

5. Lack of evidence: Much research is on-going and is being tracked by the Department of Energy and Climate Change; our ability to do this relies upon adequate resourcing of science and engineering teams. Furthermore, we have actively encouraged further research by commissioning the gaps report as mentioned above, and will continue to engage with other potential funders e.g. the research councils, also the co-ordinating body LWEC (Living with Environmental Change).

6. Risk that NETS are promoted by their advocates to such an extent that this causes complacency amongst policymakers: NETs have not been discussed in the UNFCCC process and this is unlikely to change until publication of the IPCC’s Synthesis report in 2014. Available evidence suggests the costs of NETS are large, as are their demands for energy and/or land, for which there are competing uses, making NETs an unattractive prospect compared to many mitigation options. However some mitigation scenarios assume a large role for NETS, the risks and costs of which are not always spelled out. The way to deal with this risk is to firm up the evidence.

7. Risk that some organisation or country will ‘go it alone’: This has already happened in the case of ocean fertilisation experiments, therefore the most pressing need is to amend the London Protocol–A proposal to do this has been submitted which would regulate placement of matter for ocean fertilisation and other marine geoengineering activities. The proposal will be discussed and potentially adopted at the forthcoming meeting of the Governing Bodies of the London Convention and Protocol on 14th – 18th October 2013. The effect of this amendment would be to require Parties to subject proposals for ocean fertilisation research to an assessment framework and a permitting process. Full-scale deployment of ocean fertilisation would continue not to be permitted. The amendment would also make it possible in the future to regulate other marine geoengineering activities by adding them to a new annex to the Protocol. The Government (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) has participated fully in this process.

8. CBD and the precautionary approach: The Government (the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) participated fully in negotiations on climate-related geoengineering at the 10th and 11th Conferences of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, in 2010 and 2012. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs provided support to the CBD in undertaking expert reviews of impacts of NETs and potential regulatory mechanisms.

9. Government has made a very specific reaction to the challenges of these technologies, by establishing a cross-Whitehall Working Group on geoengineering in 2011, led by the Department of Energy and Climate Change and with membership drawn from relevant government departments. The Group’s Terms of Reference are attached below. It allows government departments to update one another on developments, share views and determine a government position e.g. it has produced a position on geoengineering research which is applicable to NETs: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/geoengineering-research-the-government-s-view

10. Lack of evidence: Many NETS are immature technologies and at present our reaction is effective. The Department of Energy and Climate Change has sufficient science and engineering expertise to be able to assess publications and emerging proposals; this would no longer be the case, however, if the subject requires increasing attention, unless resources were correspondingly increased.

11. Risk that NETS proponents cause complacency amongst policy makers –Department of Energy and Climate Change staff are working to ensure that the risks of relying on NETS are always spelled out; in particular it is important that IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers include consideration of these risks.

12. The London Protocol has yet to be amended and only time will tell if the regulatory regime, if adopted, is effective.

13. The CBD adopted a decision in 2010 that placed an effective moratorium on the application of geoengineering techniques until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities, with an exception for small scale scientific research studies. This moratorium remains in place, but is not legally binding. In 2012, the CBD adopted a decision to further review evidence on impacts of geoengineering following review by the IPCC in 2014. The Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs engagement with the CBD has ensured a joined-up, proportionate and evidence-based approach to regulation of geoengineering.

ANNEX Ci: The Cross-Government Working Group on Geoengineering: Terms of reference

1. These Terms of Reference were agreed at the first meeting of the Working Group on 19 July 2011.

2. The Working Group will develop a Government position on geoengineering for climate change purposes, based on the current evidence and level of knowledge. In particular, it will focus on issues surrounding governance of geoengineering research and any proposed deployment to ensure safe and responsible action, building on discussions within the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (SRMGI) and the London Convention and Protocol.

3. The Working Group will:

1. agree an appropriate definition of “geoengineering”;
2. provide a forum for discussing geoengineering and ensure an awareness across departments of related issues within national and international conventions, research etc.;
3. develop a Government position on governance of geoengineering research and deployment based on current knowledge and new knowledge as it emerges over the duration of the Working Group;
4. identify key features that should be included as part of any international governance framework(s) for geoengineering;
5. develop a set of proposals for (flexible) international governance arrangements that are appropriate for the range of techniques that currently exist and could exist in the future;
6. agree responsibilities for different aspects of geoengineering for each Department;
7. agree necessary next steps for Government in order to develop a future strategy for addressing geoengineering research and development, and deployment;
8. consider the Government’s role in developing geoengineering techniques in the future.

4. Standing Order: Working Group Membership

1. The Working Group will be limited to around 15 members comprising senior policy and science advisors from Government departments that have or are expected to have an interest in geoengineering including research, deployment and governance. This includes the Department of Energy and Climate Change, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Government Office for Science, Department of Business, Innovation and Skills and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

2. The Working Group will be chaired by Paul Hollinshead on behalf of Professor David MacKay (The Department of Energy and Climate Change CSA). The Department of Energy and Climate Change will provide the secretariat.

3. Members will be responsible for coordinating views and input from their respective departments.

4. External experts will be invited to provide advice to the group as necessary but will not be formal members of the Group.

5. Standing Order: Meeting Frequency and Papers

1. The working group will meet approximately every three months or until its work is concluded.
2. Meetings will be timed to take into account external activities and events of relevance, such as the IPCC’s expert meeting on Geoengineering (June 2011) and the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative meetings and reports.
3. The agenda for each meeting will be agreed by all members prior to each meeting and minutes will be circulated.
4. Each member will be responsible for sharing papers within their respective Department as necessary.

6. Standing Order: Additional meetings

1. Meetings with external experts will be convened as necessary to update Working Group members on developments within research and governance.

ANNEX Cii: Technology Innovation Needs Assessments

Background

1. The Technology Innovation Needs Assessments (TINA) project seeks to enhance the focus, coordination and delivery of the Government’s support for innovation in low carbon technologies. The TINAs inform prioritisation by identifying and valuing the key innovation needs of those technologies likely to be important in meeting the UK’s energy and climate change targets and in delivering economic benefits out to 2050.

2. While the TINA project was not originally conceived as a formal horizon scanning process, it does provide some of the benefits associated with horizon scanning. By applying a systematic analysis to low carbon innovation over the long term, and by capturing a wide range of views from government, industry and academia, the TINAs highlight potential technology developments and the prospects for capitalising on innovation to deliver cost reductions and business growth. The TINA project is the first time these benefits have been systematically considered and articulated.

Process and structure

3. The TINAs are a collaborative effort between the members of the Low Carbon Innovation Coordination Group (LCICG). LCICG meets on a bimonthly basis and brings together the major UK public-sector backed funders of low carbon innovation to work together to maximise the impact of government investment in innovation. The objectives of the TINA project are to:

1. Create a robust shared knowledge base to guide government innovation investment decisions.
2. Create a common understanding of innovation needs and the case for support to facilitate coordinated planning between LCICG members, and with developers.
3. Allow cross-comparison and prioritisation between technologies.
4. Enable government to send clear messages to developers about UK priorities and approach.

4. The TINAs make full use of existing research and experience across government and delivery bodies, but with new modelling and analysis to address gaps and allow cross-comparison. The TINAs’ particular value comes from:

1. The pooling of expertise and the development of a consensus view amongst a broad range of innovation funding organisations.
2. Applying a consistent methodology to the assessment of a diverse range of low carbon technologies, to help government and private sector investors prioritise investment.

5. The TINA analytical framework was developed and implemented by Carbon Trust with contributions from all core LCICG members, as well as from numerous other expert individuals and organisations. LCICG worked with representatives from relevant sectors to ensure that the most robust data possible was fed into the TINA process.

TINA technologies

6. There are many low carbon technologies that could make a valuable contribution to the UK’s energy mix between now and 2050. For the first wave of TINAs, LCICG focussed on those technologies that previous analysis suggested were of particular importance to government objectives, where insufficient clarity existed, and/or where multiple LCICG bodies had an interest.

7. The first wave is now very nearly complete and includes the following:

1. Offshore Wind
2. Marine Energy
3. Non-domestic Buildings
4. Domestic Buildings
5. Heat
6. Bioenergy
7. Electricity Networks & Storage
8. Industrial Sector
9. Carbon Capture and Storage
10. Nuclear Fission
11. Hydrogen (in development)

8. As technologies develop over time, it is expected that the TINAs will need reviewing in order to keep the coverage and content up to date.

9. Before each TINA is finalised, key elements are tested with industry and academic experts on a bilateral basis. Following completion, workshops with relevant market experts and LCICG members are undertaken to check the findings. Outputs consist of an Analysis Pack (100-300 slides per TINA), which is then summarised into a 15-20 page Summary Report for publication. Each TINA includes:

1. An assessment of the value of the technology and the innovation in meeting emissions and other energy policy targets at lowest cost.
2. An assessment of the value of the technology and the innovation in UK business creation.
3. An assessment of the case for UK public sector support, including a review of current international, private sector and the Government backed activity, and a consideration of market failures.
4. A summary of the highest priority innovation needs.

Using the TINA Findings

10. The Department of Energy and Climate Change used the emerging TINA findings in developing its Low Carbon Innovation Programme Portfolio for the current Spending Review period.

11. TINAs have informed, and been informed by, other relevant policy developments e.g. the UK Bioenergy strategy.

1. TINA findings have helped LCICG to align members’ forward plans e.g. on marine energy, offshore wind and CCS.
2. The TINAs sit behind the Low Carbon Innovation Strategy, which is now being developed by LCICG for publication in autumn 2013. The Strategy will provide a shared vision of LCICG’s aims, principles, approach and priorities within low carbon technology families for public investment between now and 2020.

12. For more information on the TINA project see:

http://www.lowcarboninnovation.co.uk/working_together/technology_focus_areas/overview