Developing STFC’s Science and Technology strategy

1. Developing STFC’s Science and Technology strategy John Womersley Director, Science Strategy June 2007

2. Who are we? • The Council was created on April 1, 2007 • It is responsible for • fundamental research in particle physics, nuclear physics, astronomy, space • major UK facilities for the physical and life sciences • synchrotrons, light sources, lasers, neutrons • national laboratories at RAL, Daresbury, UKATC • international science projects • CERN, ESO, ESA, ILL, ESRF… • Over 2000 staff and an annual budget of over £700M

3. World Class Science Fund the best research, working for the UK as a whole Adventurousnot “solid” Doing new thingsnot doing the same thing with smaller errors Influencing a projectnot tagging along Focused on excellencenot make sure we are doing a bit of everything

4. Science strategy Over the next year or so, we need to • Identify and prioritise the scientific opportunities likely to arise within the next fifteen years or so, understanding the scientific potential, the competitive context, the technologies required for their success and an estimate of the cost • Prioritise short to medium-term investment projects in the context of funds available • Carry out a programmatic review of current projects and programmes

5. The strategy must then inform a detailed STFC scientific investment plan against the budget set by Council It must • Connect with the research communities and the other research councils • Be clearly communicated and explained to staff and stakeholders

6. The strategy must also … • Be an international strategy • Successfully carrying out our strategy is likely to involve our asserting a greater degree of influence over the strategies of the international organisations that we are members of • When we engage internationally with partners on ESFRI projects, or with India or China, we must be mindful of the place of these projects in our science strategy

7. Be a people strategy • Our science capabilities depend on our skills base and training • Movement of skilled people is of great importance to economic impact • Be coordinated with plans for the Harwell and Daresbury campuses • If the campuses are to “deliver a radically new way of doing science” the science strategy must support this. • If we wish to anchor each campus with an ESFRI-class facility we need a closely coordinated approach between science strategy, campus strategy and the international office.

8. Be a science and technology strategy • Can’t meaningfully separate the two • STFC’s science programmes drive technology • STFC’s facilities enable technology development

9. Strategy development Facilities In-house expertise Science Strategy Team Science Committees Peer Review

10. Committees and peer review Now in place Science Board PPAN PALS Still to be finalised Scope of PPRP? Separate panel for R&D? AGP PPRP etc. PPGP NPGP new Accelerator Science and Technology Advisory Board ASTAB

11. STFC Science Board • Professor Sir Peter Knight, Imperial College (chair) • Professor Jenny Thomas, UCL (deputy chair) • Professor Gabriel Aeppli, London Centre for Nanotechnology • Professor John Ellis, CERN • Professor Monica Grady, Open University • Professor Matt Grifffin, University of Cardiff • Professor Douglas Kell, University of Manchester • Professor Tony Ryan, University of Sheffield

12. PPAN science committee • Professor Walter Gear, Cardiff (chair) • Dr. Jordan Nash, IC/CERN (deputy chair) • Dr. David Barnes, Aberystwyth • Dr. Iain Bertram, Lancaster • Professor Michael Bode, LJMU • Professor Jonathan Butterworth, UCL • Professor Yvonne Elsworth, Birmingham • Professor Brian Fulton, York • Professor Ruth Gregory, Durham • Professor Sheila Rowan, Glasgow

13. PALS science committee • Dr. Katherine Brown, Imperial College • Professor Athene Donald, Cambridge • Professor Carole Goble, Manchester • Professor Michael Gunn, Birmingham • Professor Ken McKendrick, Herriott-Watt • Professor Steven Rose, Imperial College • Professor Chick Wilson, Glasgow • Professor Phil Withers, Manchester • Professor Paul Attfield, Edinburgh • (+ one vacancy) • Chair TBN

14. Science strategy team • Small group of order six people, seconded from universities etc. to bring new and different viewpoints • In process of being set up • Professor Louise Harra (UCL) • Professor John Zarnecki (Open University) • Goals • Horizon scanning for opportunities, new ideas, brainstorming • Select and develop ideas to take forward • Examples: • Energy • Cross council programmes on stem cells and security

15. Communication • Communication is critical • Within the organisation • With the research communities • With the other research councils • With the government • With international partners • With the public • … S&T Strategy will be tightly coupled to communications • Good communication is especially critical when resources are tight and the community is under stress

16. Particle and nuclear physics • What can particle and nuclear physics expect? • Short term – continuity • Existing grants and awards will continue • PPAN will continue the broad direction established by PPARC, with nuclear physics brought into the process • New Nuclear Physics Grants Panel • Longer term – opportunities and challenges • PP/NP projects will be part of a much broader spectrum of activities • Opportunity to secure funding from a larger pool • … but need to make case in a wider forum

17. Saying no • Resources are limited • We will need to say “no” to good science • This is a real shame • but we can’t borrow (or print) money And if we’re going to say “no” • Best to say “no” sooner • Best to say “no” to whole projects

18. Proteins or protons? • How to compare projects in very different areas? • Viki Weisskopf’s diagram • Good proposals lie near the boundary • Goal is to push the boundary upwards and to the right intrinsic(“science”) interest 1 2 4 3 external impact

19. We need to think about a large number of potential projects… • HiPER • Extreme Light Infrastructure • DIPOLE laser • ESS and/or a MW neutron source • ILL 20/20 upgrade • ESRF upgrade • European ELT • SKA • ESA centre at Harwell • FAIR (nuclear physics) • ISIS Target Station 2 phase II • Diamond phase III • Diamond “Sapphire” upgrades • Materials Innovation and Imaging Institute • Computational science centre • 4GLS light source • LHC upgrade • International linear collider • Neutrino factory • Underground Science • …

20. Remember • for UK projects • We control the schedule and the overall scope • We can choose “yes”, “no” or “not yet” • For international projects • We do not control the schedule or the scope • But we have the flexibility to choose a level of participation

21. Large Facilities Roadmap • Timeline • “Long list” of projects being finalised now • Consultation process over the summer • Prioritisation • first within each research council, then jointly • in the autumn • New roadmap by end of year

22. A draft set of criteria • Scientific impact and timeliness • Does it offer the potential for breakthroughs in its area? • “tear up the textbooks?” • Economic impact • Societal impact • Education, outreach, training/skills, match to public policy priorities • Level of UK leadership or UK impact • Breadth of community served • Risk • Match with the views of other research councils and communities • Coherence and synergy across programme • does it enhance and/or exploit existing facilities or subscriptions • does it exploit our unique capabilities and/or skills base • match to DSIC/HSIC campus developments • The European context, ESFRI, need for quid pro quo? • The global context, India/China etc.

23. Final thoughts • Our long-term ability to generate more support depends on more than just good science. We must also show that • we can plan • we can prioritise • we can stop things (even when they are good) • we can be imaginative • we can “do more” • we are relevant (economic impact, society, education…) This is what the Science and Technology Strategy will aim to do

24. MICE issues • Schedule • Common fund • Support for MICE • MICE phase II in the UK

25. backups

26. Questions, comments on these issues or on the programme? Your input is welcome john.womersley@stfc.ac.uk 01793 442622

27. In the coming year • “Business continuity” • Grants, proposals, project oversight… • Taking stock • A broad programmatic review • Review of accelerator R&D (cross-STFC) • New ideas • Two areas where we should “think different” in the short term: • Communications • Campus developments • The creation of STFC gives us a mandate and an opportunity in both these areas

28. Younger members of the audience (and the young at heart) we are looking to you More ambition, more excellence Let’s see how good we can be