iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

I think a department focused on S&T issues is increasingly important imo. But, politically, I don't think Labour would have created DSIT had it not been there already. I would like Patrick and Kanishka to stay. There is experience and expertise there, and a good agenda to build on.

100

Then there’s Whitehall itself. Would DSIT survive a Burnham reshuffle? Who becomes tech secretary and science minister, if either role changes hands? How far would the Treasury permit devolution to go? The first appointments will tell us a great deal.

210

We need a more granular discussion: Which R&D spending decisions should remain national? Which are better made locally? Which require joint stewardship?

100

We need to avoid the false binary caricature: 🎯 concentrating everything in the Golden Triangle under the banner of 'excellence' (ignoring spatial effects) vs. 🍯 spreading the jam with no regard for national capability or local strengths.

R&D capability isn’t evenly spread, nor is absorptive capacity. Poorly designed allocations would waste money & damage competitiveness. And if spend is totally fungible, long-term R&D investment could be commandeered for short-term political pressures.

100

But maximalist R&D devolution could be perilous. Internationally competitive science is a public good requiring national stewardship. The primary purpose of R&D is not regional growth or fairness.

100

Could we see… 👾 a semiconductor manufacturing facility? 🧬 a supersized bioreactor? 🚀 missions built around local problems? Some initiatives would fail (& would need to be allowed to); some would be transformational.

100

The more radical opportunity is positive heterogeneity. Acting in their own interests, places could make different bets from national government. We could see greater coherence & distinctiveness – strengthening healthy competition.

100

M’cr would almost certainly argue that they could do more with more powers (e.g. over skills, energy and rail) and more money - possibly a big increase in devolved R&D spending. There could be opportunities here…

100

What Greater Manchester achieved within the current settlement is largely about strategy rather than control of the research budget Building on existing strengths, it used devolved powers, local institutions & civic leadership to join up transport, skills, planning & investment

100

As mayor of a core city outside the Golden Triangle, Burnham had a better view than most of what regional innovation ecosystems can do: attract investment & talent, create high-skill jobs, embed ‘triple helix’ collaboration between unis, industry & govt.

100

Kirsty Grainger @kirstygrainger.bsky.social · 20/06/2026

“Manchesterism” is going national. What might a Burnham premiership mean for science? Devolved R&D? There are opportunities & risks. We’ve been thinking about this at @science.works – here’s a taster of our thinking… 🧵

111

Reposted by Ben Johnson

Passing on a chuckle from my morning. The @ukri.org main office is in Swindon. Their new buckets system was introduced late 2025. There is an Indie Band formed in 2025 from Swindon called..... Bucket Fight! www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/2621200...

swindonadvertiser.co.uk

Two indie rock bands to bring 'epic' live show to Swindon pub

Foot-stomping indie rock comes to The Victoria with The Pavilion & Bucket Fight

173

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 19/06/2026

➡️ "Reorganising Research" - a new initiative to consider how to increase diversity and dynamism in the institutional landscape science.works/reorganising...

science.works

Reorganising Research — Science Works

Reorganising Research, a workstream within the Institutional Dynamism project at Science Works. A call for evidence and an essay-writing prize.

100

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 19/06/2026

Some bits to pick over: ➡️ Interview with me and co-founder Laura Ryan in research professional: www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-p... ➡️ Our first (non-linear!) essay on the linear model of innovation by Will Stone science.works/writing/line...

researchprofessionalnews.com

Push to build evidence for UK research policy launches - Research Professional News

Current decision-making not “sufficiently evidence-based”, say founders of new “policy and research studio” Science Works

100

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 19/06/2026

Announcement: am launching @science.works -- a new org to accelerate UK R&D. A post to explain why I think a new org is needed: www.ersatzben.com/p/introducin... £3k essay prize and call for evidence open now at science.works

ersatzben.com

Introducing Science Works

Why I think a new organisation is needed to tackle the most pressing challenges facing British science and tech

172

Reposted by Ben Johnson

UK Research and Innovation @ukri.org · 27/03/2026

This letter followed evidence given by STFC Executive Chair Michele Dougherty to the Committee on 4 March. Today, our response to the letter has been published on the Committee's webpage. In the interest of openness and transparency UKRI is also publishing it here: www.ukri.org/publications...

ukri.org

19 March 2026: UKRI and DSIT respond to Select Committee letter

Professor Sir Ian Chapman and Lord Vallance respond to a letter from the Chair of the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee.

223

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 27/03/2026

National 'missions' are easy to announce (or propose). But history shows that they are extraordinarily difficult to pull off. Laura Ryan and I have pooled our thoughts about the government's 'AI for Science' missions – and what has to be true for this programme to be a success. 🔗👇

betterscienceproject.substack.com

How not to waste an AI for science mission

On the regrettable necessity of thinking carefully before spending public money

010

Reposted by Ben Johnson

Richard Jones @richardaljones.bsky.social · 15/03/2026

For more than a decade, there’s been a cross-party consensus behind increasing the UK govt’s R&D spending to drive economic growth - & there’s been a substantial real terms increase in the science budget. But the economic growth hasn’t arrived, yet. What happens if it doesn’t?

UK government R&D spending in real terms

535

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 17/02/2026

The China effect is major, but doesn’t appear to be decisive in the data across all fields. I’m going to put some more analysis out soon on this!

010

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 17/02/2026

They do in these three topics, but don’t in most others of the 4500 topics. Am putting it down to coincidence for now while I dig into it further.

100

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 15/02/2026

Ah, I downloaded and used the whole data snapshot with custom python queries, so didn’t use this website interface - I’ll have to dig into it a bit further to check presence of these key papers.

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 15/02/2026

Thanks Tara! I'm counting papers with any author affiliation to a UK institution. (Co-authorship will count as a UK paper.) The 'UK share' is simply that number divided by the total count of papers globally. It's v v simplistic – but I think OK as a broad-brush participation metric!

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 14/02/2026

I've written about the UKRI funding situation and the 'buckets' explainer, looking in detail at QR, STFC and Quantum. www.ersatzben.com/p/the-bucket...

ersatzben.com

The Bucket Stops Here

UKRI’s new funding framework takes a stab at classifying budgets – but doesn’t yet govern research

31812

Ben Johnson @ersatzben.com · 08/02/2026

This is one of the absolute best things I’ve read on the potential impacts of AI on society and democracy. Forensic, principled, and sober. Bravo, @williamcb.bsky.social!!

112

The buckets seem to me to be about administrative control, not epistemic posture. That's fine, but putting QR in Bucket 1 then assumes that universities can't walk and chew gum at the same time. But unis are actually pretty good at working with their partners to deliver on govt priorities.

Then look at Quantum: a huge fraction of the work is absolutely curiosity-driven, but it's squarely in bucket 2. This is because there is a Strategy and a Programme! But that's an administrative question which has nothing to do with how the research is actually done.

120

I assume it is because someone naively believes that curiosity-driven research is reducible to "stuff the govt doesn't control", and so the reverse must also be true: anything that is not directly in the grip of the state is simply a curiosity that must be indulged.

220

Paul Nightingale @paulnightingale.bsky.social · 01/02/2026

Looking again at the UKRI funding 'buckets', I find it weird that QR has been put into 'Bucket 1' (curiosity-driven research), given that it supports a range of activity across all buckets, and REF does not only measure 'curiosity'.

241

Reposted by Ben Johnson

Quick science policy thread 1 Changes in the governance of UK science since the mid 1980s make it extremely hard to be strategic (that was the point), in terms of both process (dropped) and capability (hollowed out).

21820

Because the media are locking in - I’ve had several calls today from broadsheet journos. And the senior physicists and mathematicians I was with on Friday were hopping mad about cuts and gearing up for a big showdown. So it needed an urgent response.

These are good questions - ones that I don’t think today‘s crisis comms can easily address. I hope we get answers.

It’s direct. Diplomatic but fairly pointed about how STFC got here, and that STFC‘s mess is not a template for discovery research across the board. And clearly taking responsibility - visibly and legibly - for tough choices. And I liked that he signed “Ian”, not Professor Sir etc. Not hiding.