Cambridge and Cranfield universities have been collectively awarded a £5 million government supplement for research, with Cambridge receiving almost £4 million of this total. The aim of the grant is to propel scientific and engineering research into the business market, and to ensure that good research proposals are carried out to completion.

The supplement demonstrates the government’s interest in bolstering a British ‘Silicon Valley’, as described by Business Secretary Vince Cable. It is hoped that the funding will contribute to the UK’s scientific future and encourage investment in projects that could support the British economy.

The government’s choice to invest in Cambridge is motivated by more than simply the University’s impressive research history. Earlier last month, Moody gave Cambridge a stable AAA credit rating, marking its bonds as a sound investment.

The University was praised for having an “outstanding market position”, “stable revenue”, and was identified as an essential asset to the UK economy. Business Secretary Vince Cable said: ”Where we have world class Universities, Cambridge being one of them, we want to get behind them and help them turn their brilliance and their academic ideas into good businesses, which create jobs in Britain.”

Dr Richard Jennings of Cambridge University commented on the research grant, praising it as “tremendous”, and adding that it will significantly assist the University in becoming more efficient “in transferring knowledge into society.’

However, data compiled by Times Higher Education revealed that the cumulative income from research grants to the University in the past year was cut significantly. Out of the top ten universities ranked by income received from grants, Cambridge suffered the greatest drop, with Research Council funding falling by 34% from £85.2 million in 2010-2011 to £56.2 million in 2011-2012.

Seven out of the top ten universities saw a fall in income from research, with Imperial College London, the number one institution in terms of Research Council funding, seeing their funding drop from £94.5 million to £76.7 million.

The fall in research funding offered to UK institutions has caused concern in recent weeks. The Chair of the Russell Group, Professor Michael Arthur, and Director General Wendy Piatt, expressed worries last month in a foreword to a report on the importance on leading universities: “It’s vital that in straitened economic times, the UK government does not make the grave mistake of making cuts to higher education and research funding or spreading limited funds too thinly.”
“UK government policy has, to some extent, recognised the importance of investing in research, concentrating resources on excellence and allowing universities to raise more funds from private sources.”

“But to compete globally our leading institutions must be able to secure sufficient funds. Only that way can they boost our economy and prosper in ways that will benefit everyone.”

The foreword claims: “Many countries of a comparable size and world influence would dearly love to possess even a tiny handful of our leading universities”. However, it adds that “worryingly for us, right now many of them are doing everything they can to emulate what we already have.”

The Guardian reported on 14 November that by next October, a university will be assessed by its ability to justify the impact of its ‘impact’ research on public life. This impact of a department will then form a fifth of the score during its assessment for the Research Excellence Framework (REF).

Dr Alisdair Pinkerton from Royal Holloway believes that “in an era of decreased funding where fewer grants are available, there’s something about being a bit more entrepreneurial that I’m detecting in the sector, on behalf of your own academic career.”