As will be explained in more detail in Chapters 6 and 7, through an analysis of the key documents, the current process of emphasising the importance of research and development can be traced back to the mid-1990s and a series of reports,
3.4 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF STI POLICY 49 and probably more importantly actions following those reports implementing the majority of the recommendations.
The Lynch-Miller report on Science and Irish Economic Development, com- missioned in 1963 and published in 1966 [Lynch and Miller, 1966], was perhaps the first significant step on the route towards investment in research and devel- opment. The report, along with OECD pressure could be considered to have led to the foundation of the National Science Council to advise on research, develop- ment and technology policy. Later in the 1960s the government introduced the first grants to support industrial research and development.
In the early 1970s the National Science Council produced a number of reports, including Cooper and Whelan [Cooper and Whelan, 1973], that highlighted poor Irish performance relative to other OECD countries in terms of expenditure on research and development in industry.
In the 1980s several influential reports were published:
1. The Telesis Report [Magaziner, 1982], a review of Irish industrial policy that recommended that policy should focus more on indigenous industry, and on addressing weaknesses in management, marketing and technology; 2. The National Economic and Social Council [NESC, 1982] report on indus-
trial policy.
3. A whitepaper on Industrial Policy [DETE, 1984] which was published two years after these reports.
However, it was the 1990s that saw a real sea change in attitudes to SET in Irish industrial policy. A whole series of reports contributed to this change in attitude: the Culliton Report [Culliton, 1992], The STIAC Report [STIAC, 1995], and the CIRCA Report [CIRCA, 1996]. These contributed to the first government White Paper on Science, Technology and Innovation [OST, 1996]. In
their end-of-year report the director of Forf´as highlights the key elements of this
publication, and its genesis in the earlier reports:
“The first ever Government White Paper on science, technology and innovation was launched on behalf of the Government by the Minister for Commerce, Science and Technology in November 1996. It marks a new beginning in the national approach to science and technology. The White Paper evolved from the work of the Culliton Report, the Science, Technology and Innovation Advisory Council (STIAC) and of the Task Force on the implementation of the STIAC
Report chaired by the Chief Executive of Forf´as. The White Paper
aims to locate science and technology firmly within the framework of wider industrial, economic and national development policies.
A number of decisions in the White Paper were identified for pri- ority action. These include:
• the establishment of a new interdepartmental committee to en- sure a coherent and comprehensive approach to national expen- ditures on science and technology;
• the establishment of a Science Council with representatives of industry, universities, research organisations and other interests, to provide strong and objective advice which would contribute to the national science and technology planning process;
• additional actions by Forbairt to increase the level of technology transfer in industry;
• an initiative on inter-firm collaboration which would encourage firms to co-operate in strategic activities, such as research and development, and help to overcome disadvantages of small scale; • new structures to achieve more effective management of the im-
portant Programmes in Advanced Technology;
• a campaign to increase the level of awareness and greater appre- ciation of the importance of science, technology and innovation.
Forf´as will have a substantial involvement in the implementation
of the decisions set out in the White Paper. The new Science Council
will be established by Forf´as, in consultation with the Minister for
Commerce, Science and Technology. Forf´as will manage the aware-
ness campaign on Science and Technology issues and will have an important role in monitoring the implementation of the decisions an- nounced in the White Paper.”
[Forf´as, 1996]
In subsequent years many of the key bodies were established to help pursue the science, technology and innovation policy, here these are listed in chronological order, but note that some of the items represent a renaming or re-branding of a previous body:
• Forbairt (1994)—established to be Ireland’s industrial development agency with responsibilities that included managing research funding aimed at link- ing academia and industry, in particular the PATs (Programmes for Ad- vanced Technology) and the BRG (Basic Research Grant scheme). Prior to the large investment in research in the higher education institutions in the late 1990s these were the largest sources of research funding for academics
3.4 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF STI POLICY 51
“Forbairt was established on 1 January 1994 as an Agency of Forf´as un-
der the provisions of the Industrial Development Act, 1993. Our aim is to support Irish firms in all sectors, together with overseas companies operat- ing from Ireland in the food and natural resources sectors, across a range of commercial activities including management, product development, and finance. Central to this aim is the goal of bringing science and technology to the centre stage of Irish economic development.” [Forbairt, 1998];
• Forf´as (1994)—established to the national policy and advisory board for
enterprise, trade, science, technology and innovation;
• EGFSN (1997) Expert Group on Future Skills Needs—analyses industry
needs for training and feeds into policy—Forf´as provides administrative
and research support;
• ICSTI (1997) Irish Council for Science Technology and Innovation—effectively a modern version of the National Science Council that had lapsed after its
activity in the 1970s—Forf´as provides administrative and research support;
• EI (1998) Enterprise Ireland—replaced Forbairt—responsible for indigenous industry and for applied research linking academia and industry—it revised the PATs and produced a series of funding instruments collectively termed the Commercialisation Fund (CF) that now comprise the majority of ap- plied research funding available in Ireland;
• Technology Foresight (1998)—is a set of activities carried out by ICSTI “An objective of Technology Foresight is to identify future-proof strategies which will ensure that the science and technology infrastructure of a nation has the capacity to promote and support innovative industry into the fu- ture. Accordingly, the Irish Council for Science Technology and Innovation (ICSTI) started Ireland’s first Technology Foresight exercise in March 1998. The Council established eight Technology Foresight Panels to consider the future technology needs of key sectors.” [ICSTI, 1999]—identified the two sectors of Biotechnology and Information Communications Technologies as strategically important and thus the SFI was established and charged with prioritising these two areas;
• SFI (2000) Science Foundation Ireland—established on the model of the NSF (National Science Foundation) in the United States of America to manage research funding awarded to individual principal investigators pri- marily for research programmes in Biotechnology and Information Commu- nications Technologies (as identified by the Technology Foresight exercise to be national priorities);
• OSTI (2004) the Office for Science Technology and Innovation—responsible for the development, promotion and co-ordination of Ireland’s STI policy; and Ireland’s policy in European Union and international research activities; • IRCHSS (2000) Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sci-
ence;
• IRCSET (2001) Irish Research Council for Science Engineering and Tech- nology;
• ACSTI (2005) Advisory Council for Science, Technology and Innovation—in April 2005 the ICSTI was re-branded as ACSTI, more recently the abbrevi- ation preferred is ASC, the Advisory Science Council, though the logo still uses the full name of ACSTI.
The HEA (Higher Education Authority) already existed as the body that man- aged relations with the Irish universities. A new research funding programme was established, the PRTLI (Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions), administered by the HEA, but open to the Institute of Technology (IoT) sector as well as the universities. This funding was organised into a series of cycles in
the period 1999 to 2007 (grand total e865.7 Million):
• Cycle 1 announced in 1999, funding period 2000-2003, total fundinge206.1M;
• Cycle 2 announced in 2000, funding period 2001-2004, total fundinge78.5M;
• Cycle 3 announced in 2001, funding period 2002-2006, total fundinge320.4M;
• Cycle 4 announced in 2007, funding period 2007-2011, total fundinge230M.
These funding cycles were administered as institutional submissions, i.e. a single integrated submission from each university, with internal research strategy deciding which sub-proposals would be incorporated in each institution’s inte- grated capital and recurrent proposal. Thus a significant side effect of this pro- cess has been the maturity of the institutional research strategies that now exist compared with the mid-1990s. Indeed a formal submission of the institutional research strategy was required as part of the submission process, and played an
important part in the evaluation process. Cycle 5 (total funding e300M was
announced in January 2009.
At the heart of the integrated STI policy for Ireland are the Department of Education (that oversees HEA), and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (that oversees IDA, EI and the SFI). These departments collabo- rate on an integrated policy for science and technology, with the support of the Department of the Taoiseach (prime minister).