Written evidence submitted by the National Institutes of Bioscience (NIB) (COM0032)
Background
The National Institutes of Bioscience is a partnership that brings together the eight bioscience research institutes that are strategically funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC): The Babraham Institute, The Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), The Genome Analysis Centre (TGAC), The Institute of Food Research (IFR), The John Innes Centre, The Pirbright Institute, The Roslin Institute and Rothamsted Research.
The views expressed here are independent of the Research Councils.
The mission of the National Institutes of Bioscience is to deliver a national strategy in bioscience and strengthen the international reputation of the UK as a world leader in bioscience research. This requires scientists to engage with and communicate their research to a variety of audiences and stakeholders. Professional public engagement and science communication staff at each Institute support and facilitate activities that:
Public, private and charitable sources of funding all recognise the importance of such activities to maximise the socio-economic impact of the research undertaken and require scientists to carefully consider how they will communicate their findings in their grant applications (for example in the ‘Pathways to Impact’ statements in RCUK grants or the ‘Communication and Dissemination’ and the ‘Public Engagement’ sections in EU H2020 applications).
The trends in attitudes to science, and public engagement with science.
1. The assessment and monitoring of the public’s attitudes to science by organisations such as Wellcome Trust, the British Science Association and Understanding Animal Research, as well as by the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills’ ‘Public Attitudes to Science’ reports 2000, 2005, 2008, 2011 and 2014, provide very valuable information that contributes to inform the Institutes’ public engagement and science communication strategies.
2. The national survey of UK researchers in 2015 ‘Exploring barriers to public engagement by UK researchers’ shows that attitudes of the research community to public engagement have improved, but that more support was required to recognise and reward researchers, and thus ensure the integration of public engagement into core research activities.
3. The Babraham Institute (BI) carried out a public dialogue project (Nov 2015) that showed that:
The balance of effort needed to increase public engagement in science by 'new audiences' and by the 'already interested'.
4. In bioscience, ‘already interested’ audiences are well served by various organisations and activities that the Institutes are involved with (for example, the Royal Society Summer Science Exhibition, the British Science Festival, the Edinburgh International Science Festival, the Cambridge Science Festival and Cheltenham Science Festival).
5. Reaching new audiences who may not identify themselves as science-enthusiasts is important to all NIB Institutes and is being addressed by:
Any further steps needed by the media and broadcasters to improve the quality, accessibility and balance of their science coverage; and science coverage in broadcasters' programme-making.
6. The Institutes are pro-active in working with local, national and international media outlets. Researchers are often approached by journalists or the Science Media Centre for their comments and expertise on breaking news stories or for feature pieces on their own field of work.
7. It is worth noting that scientists are at times hesitant to work with the media because of how the story could be portrayed. Providing the source information (as well as accessible summaries where possible) for science coverage would increase the accessibility and balance of such stories and would be relatively straightforward to implement, particularly in online platforms.
8. Science programme makers could improve their coverage of:
- The scientific process – what do scientists do, how do they do it
- The value of basic research
- How long it takes research to have an impact, only the end of the process makes headlines not the number of years it took to get there
The communications strategies being taken to encourage young people to study STEM subjects in higher and further education, and to encourage those people towards STEM careers.
9. A priority for the Institutes is to promote careers in STEM subjects and to inspire and equip the next generation of scientists. Institutes do this by attending and hosting career events for secondary school pupils, encouraging researchers to become STEM Ambassadors and engaging in programmes that promote STEM subjects. Public Engagement staff at the Institutes also consult and work with teachers to develop curriculum-linked content. These activities deliberately target secondary schools and sixth form students as they are more likely to have an impact on the career choices of older students, when talking about the subjects required for a STEM related career.
10. Several Institutes have developed their own work experience programmes for 16-18 year olds that offer real insight into the work and life of research scientists (for example ‘Science Insights’ at The Roslin Institute).
11. NIB Institutes also work with organisations like the Nuffield Foundation to ensure they reach young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and thus, contribute to address the discrepancies in the take-up of higher education opportunities between different social groups.
12. Finally, the Research and Innovation Campuses that are being developed around the Institutes offer further opportunities not only for engaging with young people (for example, through the Science Outreach Centre that is being built on Easter Bush Campus) but also promote youth employment. This was recently recognised by the receipt of an Investors in Young People Award.
The extent to which public dialogue and consultation is being effectively used by Government in science and technology areas of policy-making.
13. Several Institutes have undertaken public dialogue exercises to help inform their research and public engagement strategies. These were supported by ‘Sciencewise’ a BIS funded programme to improve Government policy making involving science and emerging technology issues. The value of such exercises is currently being reviewed by the BBSRC with help of the Institutes.
14. Through NIB and independently, the Institutes have submitted evidence to government consultations, POST notes and inquiries (for example to the inquiries launched by the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology into the relationship between EU membership and the effectiveness of science, research and innovation in the UK or the Genetically Modified Insects Call for Evidence).
15. An issue for researchers undertaking these types of activities is the difficulty in tracing how a particular piece of evidence has influenced policy and thus can be recognised as an ‘Impact’ of their work.
The strategies and actions being taken by Government to foster public engagement and trust of science more widely, and high quality reporting of science in the media.
16. NIB Institutes are strategically funded by the BBSRC and adhere to the key principles of the ‘Concordat for Engaging the Public with Research’ provided by Research Councils UK. They are in regular contact with the BBSRC’s communications team and work together to promote the science that is carried out at the Institutes and share best practice.
17. Training offered by the National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement is helping to improve the quality and impact of the Institutes’ public engagement activities and the ‘Pathways to Impact’ statements in RCUK grants are helping to further embed a culture of public engagement in the Institutes.