Paul Nurse Reinforces and Amplifies His Views on Funding UK's Scientific Elite. (August 16, 2010)

Some 3½ months ago the incoming President of the Royal Society, 2001 Nobelist Paul Nurse told the The Times: "You need a combination of special systems that attract and support those who are excellent [in conjunction with] rigorous reviews so that when they cease to be excellent, as many often are, they don't just hang on to those resources."

When challenged Professor Nurse told Nature: "The words didn't come out quite right, I do think there's a need to think about how one supports the very best science, which might need to be dealt with a little bit differently from the rest," and according to Nature's Geoff Brumfiel campaigning for greater support for the very best scientists in Britain is squarely on Professor Nurse' agenda.

In an interview published in the July 26 issue of Science he was a bit more specific, and of course there has been an intervening change in government in the UK.

Q: Can you clarify your recent comment about funding scientific elites?

P.N.: I think I was misunderstood. Some people thought I was going to kill all research funding for everybody except for 100 people, which is obviously stupid. All I was saying is that for the very best, we might want to think of supporting them in a non-bureaucratic way which gives them the maximum time for their creativity.

I was very much impressed by the way Howard Hughes [Medical Institute] does funding—I'm a Howard Hughes trustee—and I thought that would be a very interesting way of doing things not simply in biomedicine but in physical sciences, chemistry, maths. [Selected researchers] would be reviewed every 5, 6, 7 years, and if they're still highly productive, they get another 7-year tranche.

Most of these individuals are already getting research council funding and so on, and it's just a question of repackaging it in a different sort of way. It would be a couple of percent of the total funding of research. It could be administered by the Royal Society. This has got to be discussed. This is just me floating an idea.

Professor Nurse was then asked what were his thoughts about the possible U.K. science budget cuts?

Two things. We have to tell the government that by cutting research today, they are in danger of burning the seed corn of the future. Because it's out of science that we will get the engine of wealth creation and improving health and improving the quality of life and our environment.

The second thing is that if they are going to reduce spending, they must always think about continuing to support the quality work. I wouldn't recommend them trying to second-guess the areas because usually committees don't do that well. What I would emphasize is supporting the highest quality people.