The Research
This research developed a comparative analysis of approaches for building ‘science regions’ in different national and regional contexts. It built on a first-phase project which explored the regionalisation of science policy in England. The objectives related to three deficits in our current knowledge:
· There is a gap in our understanding of the dynamics and drivers of shifts in the governance of science policy;
· A better understanding of approaches to building science regions in different national contexts is needed;
· There is a requirement to better articulate the assumptions on which interventions are currently based in order to lead to more effective public policy at different levels of scale.
Five regional case studies of the North West, North East, Alsace, North Rhine Westphalia and Catalonia were conducted, comprising documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews (167) at European, national and regional levels.
The Findings
1. Towards the Multi-Level Governance of Science Policy
The debate on science and regions is international in nature. The dynamics of the global knowledge economy are filtered through diverse national and regional systems and the ‘regional debate’ is unfolding in different ways. There are various financial, political, cultural and economic drivers for this, with little debate over the distinct nature of science itself as a realm of activity. A common trend towards the multi-level governance of science policy can be seen with increasing passive and active regional dimensions. However, multi-level governance is more appropriate for certain regions, rather than all regions. Governance changes in favour of the regions have paradoxically had little effect on policy outcomes in terms of the concentration of resource.
2. Building Science Regions?
Context matters: a diversity of factors - political, institutional, historical, geographical and cultural - influence attempts to build science regions. Specific regional approaches are enabled or constrained by interactions with other levels of governance and differences in regulatory regimes. Yet we also see a similarity in approach: regional interventions in science policy are best understood as physical, symbolic or additive – with transformation expected to occur automatically as a result. Science is assumed to have benefits for regional and local economies without due consideration of how these effects will be realised.
3. Excellence, Relevance and Context
Regional involvements in science policy are aimed at bringing scientific excellence and socio-economic relevance together. Yet the growth of a regional dimension to science policy has led to fears of ‘second-rate’ science and a backlash from the scientific establishment. ‘Excellence’ is becoming a game in its own right, with an emphasis on position in international league tables, emblematic science investments and the pursuit of prestige. The role of universities is key here. Universities may be ‘in’ but not ‘of’ their localities with the ‘third mission’ becoming the last choice for those universities outside the upper echelons of the global hierarchy.
4. Conclusions and Implications
Regions are more involved in science policy and are devoting significant proportions of their own resources towards the funding of the science base in the expectation that this will lead to economic development. Yet this is accompanied by a disconnection between efforts to direct and steer research within wider cluster policies and the orientation of the science base towards international competition. There is a gap between policy aspirations and the realities of implementation.
A reshaping of governance needs to be accompanied by a rethinking of science, if the aims of national and regional policy-makers for science-based economic growth are to be met. What is required is greater joined-up thinking between tiers of governance and across policy sectors and a consideration of how the attributed value to science will be realised. There can be no one-size-fits-all solution. This needs to be accompanied by an open, free and non-determined public debate about the values for, value of and role of science in society.
Academic Achievements
Building on first phase research, this project has contributed to the growth of an academic community of interest in the field of regions and science policy and the development of literatures in relation to universities and their wider roles in society. Highlights include;
Special editions on ‘Governance, Science Policy and Regions’ (forthcoming Regional Studies) and ‘Universities in the Knowledge Economy’ (2006 Social Epistemology) Peer-reviewed articles (7) / chapters (5) and 2 articles in production. A PIPE-event on ‘Governing Science: Towards an Interdisciplinary Narrative of Change?’ in November 2005 28 presentations at international academic conferences
Dissemination Activities
The ethos of intellectual rigour and policy relevance has underpinned this research. The ESRC-funded network on the ‘Embedded University’ provided the opportunity for three seminars aimed at bringing policy-makers, university managers and academics together to discuss regional and local science-based development. We have done 11 presentations within national and international policy seminars and have co-produced a special issue of Regions newsletter on ‘Building Science Regions and Cities’ (no. 263) which was distributed to national Government departments, all RDAs, the Science Cities and our international policy contacts. We have also written a short piece for Parliamentary Brief on ‘Science Cities: Round pegs, round holes’ (December 2006).
Impacts on Policy and Practice
This project has been instrumental in catalysing greater dialogue between national and regional actors in science, higher education and regional development policy and contributing to effective public policies at different levels of scale. We have engaged systematically with policy communities, evidenced by the provision of policy advice to different agencies (Universities UK, HEFCE, OECD, Science Cities, Yorkshire and Humber Universities) through value-added work. These commissions have been based on recognition of our academic credibility and policy value. A recent report for Science Cities consortium formed the basis of their submission to the Comprehensive Spending Review.