‘Devastating’ cuts to UK physics and astronomy budgets condemned

Senior scientists have condemned “drastic” cuts to existing UK research projects, warning proposed savings would be a “devastating blow for the foundations of UK physics” and a “catastrophe for science”.

The outcry follows news that the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) is seeking to reduce its budget by £162 million by 2029-30, with the council’s investments in particle physics, astronomy and nuclear physics likely to fall back to 70 per cent of what they were in 2023-24.

In a letter to project leaders sent on 28 January, the council’s executive chair Michelle Dougherty says research heads within these subjects would be asked to “identify how their project would respond to flat cash and reductions of 20 per cent, 40 per cent and 60 per cent, and also identify the funding point at which the project becomes non-viable”.

The proposed cuts follow a 15 per cent reduction in new grants to particle physics, astronomy and nuclear physics last year, explains the letter, which says the reductions reflect the Labour government’s desire for UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) to “deliver more applied and targeted research towards strategic government priorities and innovation”.

The plans, announced in December alongside indicative budget allocations, represented “an intentional move towards a more cross-disciplinary, programmatic and outcomes-focused model”, says Dougherty.

“For STFC this means striking the right balance between long-term discovery science, our major national facilities, and applied research and innovation,” explains Dougherty, adding: “To achieve this, we will need to focus our efforts on a more concentrated set of priorities, funded at a level that can be maintained over time.”

“This prioritisation process will inevitably require some difficult choices,” she continues.

The letter follows a presentation to STFC staff on the same day that revealed the likely scale of the cuts, according to Research Professional News.

“This is the most drastic cut in support in a generation,” said Mike Lockwood, president of the Royal Astronomical Society, on the proposed reductions in curiosity-driven research. 

“I urge the government to step in to stop what will be a catastrophe for science, deter young people from pursuing careers in discovery and innovation and remove any notion of the UK becoming a science superpower,” added Lockwood, professor of space environment physics at the University of Reading.

Paul Howarth, president-elect of the Institute of Physics, also criticised the plans, stating: “Cuts of this scale are a devastating blow for the foundations of UK physics, which is already battling a critical funding gap in universities, a decades-long shortage in teachers and a widespread skills shortage.”

“Physics isn’t a luxury we can afford to throw away through confusion and cuts. Our nation’s growth and security depend upon technologies invented by physics, and these in turn depend upon the physics skills, research and infrastructure which are today under threat,” he said.

“The government has promised boosts for areas like quantum, green tech and AI, and all of this is welcome, but the reality on the ground is hundreds of scientists being told their research is being slashed, jobs under threat, and no sign of the funding we’re told will replace it,” added Howarth, stating that cuts to “flagship national science facilities will…seriously harm our skills base and infrastructure”.

“These are globally renowned facilities which are the backbone of UK R&D, used by bioscience, chemistry, engineering and more,” he said.

Alicia Greated, executive director for the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE), said it was difficult to square recent  UKRI and DSIT assertions that “curiosity-led research will be protected, yet on the other hand it sets out the need for 30 per cent cuts and asks researchers to model how they could cut their active research budgets by up to 60 per cent”.

“UKRI need to explain how the cuts detailed in this letter are consistent with the commitment to protect curiosity-led research. If the investment is not going to this STFC funded research, what research will it be funding and on what basis have these decisions been made?” she added.

A UKRI spokesperson said “curiosity driven research will continue to make up around 50 per cent of our funding”, which had increased “following a spending review, which gave UKRI a record four-year settlement”.

“That doesn’t preclude changes at programme or research council level as UKRI makes choices, to be in the best position to deliver on its mission to advance knowledge, change lives and drive growth. This includes taking difficult decisions now,” they continued.

“STFC’s budget faces particular pressures due to its growing cost base – driven by unforeseeable developments since setting ambitious goals in its 2022 delivery plan, which are no longer affordable. This means that STFC needs to find savings from within its allocation. STFC is actively working with its Science Board and community to make the choices about how these savings are realised, and so put STFC on a sustainable footing.”

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com