Source: Alamy

Funding for research rated 2* (defined as ¡°internationally recognised¡±) in the 2008 research assessment exercise was fully removed in 2012 and some observers had speculated that funding for 3* (¡°internationally excellent¡±) research could also be cut in the wake of the research excellence framework results, announced in December, which revealed a big leap in the proportion of research rated 3* and 4* (¡°world-leading¡±), from 54 per cent in 2008 to 76 per cent in 2014.

However, in its annual to the ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ Funding Council for England, ministers from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills say they expect the funder to ¡°continue selectivity to fund world-leading and internationally excellent research wherever it is found¡±.

¡°Wherever it is found¡± is underlined, quashing any thought that the research budget ¨C which has not increased in cash terms since before the last general election ¨C might be purposely concentrated further in research-intensive universities.

Hefce is obliged to take the grant letter into account when devising its QR funding formula, which will be announced at the end of March.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

The letter cites the ¡°high quality¡± results of the REF as justification for the government¡¯s continuing investment in research.

¡°These successes are vital to our future economic prospects as the country now enters a period of growth,¡± it adds. ¡°New knowledge generates new companies. Skilled graduates enable our country to compete in ever-more challenging global markets. We expect our reforms and funding commitments to continue to drive economic growth.¡±

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

The letter also dampens speculation that the QR funding stream might be under threat in the post-election spending review.

¡°The dual support system has delivered an increasing share of the world¡¯s best research, and quality-related funding remains fundamental to our country¡¯s success,¡± it says.

Hefce is also asked to ¡°consider how to reward open data as part of future REF assessments¡±, and to work with Jisc to minimise the cost of the government¡¯s commitment to open access. The government has been criticised by some in the sector for the potential cost of its preference for journal-based gold open access, which often involves the payment of a fee, to repository-based green open access. However, although papers submitted to the next REF must be open access, the funding councils have not expressed such a preference.

The government also makes clear that it wants to see the benefits of its increased investment in science capital ¨C which is fixed at ?1.1 billion in real terms until 2020-21 ¨C widely shared. The grant letter directs Hefce to ¡°promote openness and collaboration through the better sharing of infrastructure, data assets and other research resources to improve the efficiency and productivity of research in a more agile sector¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Hefce is also asked to ¡°develop arrangements to provide increased transparency¡± around the impact of capital investments on ¡°the wider research base¡±.

paul.jump@tesglobal.com