Academic excellence: Is Scotland’s reputation for world-leading research at risk?

The Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (RCS) is rapidly growing its reputation for research and innovation.

That might seem strange, given the institution is embedded in Scotland’s arts and creative scene, while research and innovation are two words usually associated with the sciences. And that perceived mismatch is mirrored in the apologetic tone of Stephen Broad, RCS director of research and knowledge exchange, whenever he finds himself having to utilise the language of science and business to talk about the conservatoire’s work. He cringes when using phrases like “nexus point” and “enterprising spirit” and even “entrepreneur”, and he admits to having to “deliberately code switched to avoid using those words too much”.

Despite that language not coming naturally, Broad has been part of the effort to develop the conservatoire’s innovation work. He says there’s been a “series of step changes” to get there, starting with a small pot of money for “knowledge exchange” from the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) 15 years ago, then another “leap forward” in 2016 as RCS was awarded more money via the SFC’s Universities Innovation Fund. This allowed the conservatoire to improve its infrastructure around research and innovation, culminating in a two-year pilot of an Innovation Studio.

The studio has been able to support a range of projects, from developing practitioner training for Singing for Health – a social prescribing programme that helps people with dementia, stroke, mental health problems and more – to the Brrr sensory installation which allows people with additional support needs to enjoy theatre.

The success of all this preliminary work has been rewarded. For this academic year, the conservatoire more than doubled the cash it received from the SFC. Broad says that funding – totalling £1.5m, a pretty humble amount when compared to other university research budgets – will be used to “press go” on a number of other projects, “which is really exciting”.

Without the SFC’s support, that would not be possible. “We would have chosen one thing to do or we would have perhaps continued to test some small-scale, limited initiatives,” explains Broad.

Finding enough funding for research is a challenge faced by Scottish universities across the board. Unfortunately, Scotland’s share of funding from UKRI – the UK-wide funding body – has fallen in recent years. That’s been partly blamed on the fact that core funding from the SFC has not kept pace with core funding in England. There is also the issue that research grants almost never cover a project’s full costs, so universities must partly fund it themselves from other sources, including through international student fees.

That might be a harder thing to sell… but it’s something that will pay dividends

The Commons’ Scottish Affairs Committee was in the middle of an inquiry into science before the election was called in the summer. While it did not have enough time to produce a full report before parliament was dissolved, it did publish a letter to government summarising its early findings. It said “lower core funding and lower student fee income” left Scottish institutions in a “weaker position” than English counterparts. “This, in effect, makes Scottish institutions less competitive for UKRI grants and risks a ‘downward spiral’ and an erosion of the ‘powerhouse of higher education research in Scotland’,” the committee warned.

It’s an alarming prospect and one which Universities Scotland is keen to avoid. In its submission to the Scottish Parliament finance committee’s pre-budget scrutiny, the group highlighted how important core funding was. “It is vital that funding levels for SFC’s Research Excellence Grant (REG), the primary avenue for this institutional funding, be increased to enable Scottish universities to remain competitive for research projects funded by business, charities, or UK and international funding bodies,” it said.

However, with politicians across the UK warning of difficult decisions amid a tough fiscal outlook and public services under strain, it may be difficult to argue that more money should be going to higher education – particularly when the pay-off may be years down the line.

Jeffrey Sharkey, principal of RCS, says: “The challenge for any government is they have what’s in their face right now – it could be lots of unions demanding high pay rises and they’ve given some of them – as opposed to investment in higher education, which we argue is investment into the future. That might be a harder thing to sell if it’s not threatened strikes on your doorstep, but it’s something that will pay dividends.”

Undoubtedly, things are getting tighter, but this is not a Scottish problem at all

At particular risk is what Lesley Jackson, deputy director of Universities Scotland, refers to as “blue-sky research” because it is “not necessarily a fast movement” towards results.

She says: “The sustainability and the predictability of that funding stream is really important. Not all blue-sky research results in fundamental changes to society, as you would expect, but it does have that potential and does need that predictability of support over multiple years.

“We do have that in the stability of REG as a source of funding, but the level of funding coming is not increasing at the same rate it has increased as its equivalent in England, and that then makes it more challenging to compete for funds because it’s a very competitive environment.”

But investment in research can lead to considerable gains. Analysis by London Economics last month found that for every £1 invested in research at Scottish universities, £11 comes back to the economy. That rate of return on research is only bested by London, proving Scottish institutions punch above their weight.

And higher education plays a vital role in Scotland’s research environment more broadly. While business expenditure in R&D makes up the majority of total R&D spend in Scotland, as it does in the UK, higher education expenditure accounts for a considerably higher proportion. Well over a third (38.3 per cent) of Scotland’s total R&D spend comes from higher education, compared to under a quarter (23 per cent) for the UK as a whole.

If the Scottish Government wishes to deliver on its aim to grow the economy, there are few better investments to make. As Jackson puts it: “We recognise the fiscal environment, we understand that budgets are under pressure, but we just don’t think we can shy away from the fact that the HE sector makes a massive contribution to our economy and our society more broadly through its research and innovation activities, and we’re just looking for that to be reflected in the budget settlement.”

Scottish ministers, for their part, have recognised this. In the 2024-25 budget, university capital cash was increased which in turn allowed the SFC to increase its research budget. Helen Cross, director of research and innovation at the SFC, says: “The Scottish Government did give us extra money and we were able to uplift the REG by £10m and overall our research funding increase was 4.2 per cent. I think it shows that in a difficult funding environment the Scottish Government still thinks of research as a priority – and we haven’t been asked to make any in-year savings.”

The wider financial context facing universities is also important. The SFC’s recent report into financial sustainability concluded the position of many institutions “remains challenging”.

Cross adds: “Undoubtedly, things are getting tighter, but this is not a Scottish problem at all. The activities that universities carry out has reached a tipping point, really, with the financial crisis in the last few years and increased inflation.

“Frankly, no source of income has been able to keep up with those increased costs. People talk about a cost-of-living crisis, but it’s a cost-of-doing-business crisis for them. Wages have gone up, and also things like chemicals, the cost of construction, all of these impact universities as businesses.”

The views of the higher education sector will contribute to our considerations, as ministers prepare to publish the 2025-26 draft budget

She also points to the number of international students coming to Scotland, which has flatlined – and in some cases decreased.

“What do we know about what’s happening in institutions? More generally, they are thinking very carefully about the choices that they face about what research projects they want to get involved with… We don’t see signs that institutions are not bidding in for research projects, but I think they are probably having to think carefully about those choices.”

Cross has echoed a point made by UKRI’s deputy director Bryony Butland in a blog written two years ago, where she warned UK universities were “probably not funding research sustainably”.

Butland continued: “This might mean facing up to difficult choices, such as ultimately funding fewer projects but at a more sustainable level.”

When the Scottish Government’s published its innovation strategy in June last year, it included a pledge to “undertake an innovation funding review to be completed by the end of 2023”. Now almost the end of 2024, no such review has yet been published. It is now expected sometime before the end of March 2025.

A government spokesperson said: “As committed in the programme for government 2024-25, the Scottish Government continues to support universities with more than £350m capital funding, which includes core research and innovation grants, over the 2024-25 academic year.

“This funding supports institutions with an array of research and knowledge exchange activities – including developing early career researchers, supporting curiosity-driven research, promoting knowledge exchange, build our global reputation, leverage UK-wide and international opportunities, and enable universities to drive local economic growth.

“The views of the higher education sector will contribute to our considerations, as ministers prepare to publish the 2025-26 draft budget in the coming months.”

The innovation strategy was welcomed by the university sector when it was first published, largely because the innovation clusters align with what researchers have been working on. Nick Forsyth, vice principal at the University of Aberdeen, says it provides “increased confidence to move forward”. 

But he would welcome that funding review – and any additional funding streams that could be put in place as a result. It would help to drive innovation, particularly for projects which are “too early and too blue-sky” to catch the eye of other funders.

He adds: “Universities are, by definition, ideas and innovation factories. Our workforce is those highly skilled individuals who have been trained to be creative thinkers and problem solvers, and to work across communities and industries and business and drive those things forward. I don’t think there’s a risk that the ideas dry up.

“The benefit that we need to keep an eye on is maintaining the realisation of those ideas and ensuring that the greatest idea in the world doesn’t end up going dusty in a drawer. That’s the critical thing here… and that requires funding. That is where the REG comes in and working with UKRI, working with Scottish Government and the SFC, and beyond.”

But constraints on public finances could be a barrier to investment, and could put at risk Scotland’s reputation for producing world-leading, innovative research. Jackson argues that it’s “not so much what do we risk losing, but what do we gain from really focusing on it”.

We are, she says, already holding the prize. “Now we need to continue to grow it. When you think about the way that the world economy is moving, the sectors that will shape the future of the economy – things like quantum photonics, health and life sciences, AI – we have massive strengths in these areas in Scotland within our universities and to an extent within our business base. And that’s the prize that is there to exploit.”