138 Immunology Today, voL 4, No. 5, 1983

T h e f u t u r e for a c a d e m i c / i n d u s t r i a l c o - o p e r a t i o n

Generosity needed in spirit and purse from Keith James

Academia is under assault throughout the Western World. In the UK, reduced public spending has seriously impaired academic research for the foreseeable future. Even medicine, science and engineering have not, as the Govern- ment hoped, escaped the deleterious effects of a 15% reduction in the academic work-force 1. Forced to effect drastic economies the universities have cut costs in those areas where savings could be most readily achieved. This in- evitably, if not intentionally, has most seriously affected departments or indi- viduals with a major interest in research la. As salaries account for around 70% of university expenditure, the easiest and quickest way to achieve savings has been not to fill vacancies arising from resignation, retirement or death. At the same time, scientists who have been able to resign and take up better jobs elsewhere have often been the very people academic institutions should have retained in order to continue as centres of scientific excellence ~'2.

Those who remain in universities have found it increasingly difficult to replace valuable technical and secretarial staff. They have also found that the hard- pressed universities are more rigorous in charging (as the Universities Grants Committee recommends) overheads of up to 40% on grants awarded from sources other than Research Councils and certain other bodies. Universities undoubtedly have many overheads and most university research workers would agree to making some contribution towards these costs, but few could be readily persuaded to part with as much as 40% of their hard-won funds. Even fewer would be convinced that university overheads would be reduced significant- ly if academic research ceased altogether and universities became, as some fear, 'centres of teaching' rather than 'centres of learning'. Generally speaking, morale has slumped to an all-time low among those who pursue research in British uni- versities. The scarcity of tenured, well- qualified postdoctoral workers; minimal promotion prospects for skilled techni- cians primarily engaged in research; dwindling funds for consumables and the purchase or maintenance of research equipment: all these have contributed to the decline.

The problems seen in the UK also exist in most countries in mainland

Europe (pp. 130-132) and the position in the USA appears to be even more acute (p. 125) with the chance of a grant application being successful only half of what it was 10 years ago.

Within each national academic com- munity, there is increasing pressure for dwindling public funds, for tenure, for facilities - stresses that can lead to further intensification of inter- and intra-uni- versity, faculty and department rivalry, with more valuable energy and time wasted in promoting vested interests and protecting space and equipment. This is scarcely an atmosphere which promotes the free exchange of ideas and mutually beneficial collaboration that George Poste discusses (p. 133).

The options for academics Faced with these ever increasing diffi-

culties, what can academic research workers do? Provided they are not com- pletely demoralized they may take one of several courses of action. They may do nothing, hoping that things will event- ually improve. They may try to get research funds from elsewhere, either from the charities (also short of cash in inflationary times) or by entering into an agreement with a commercial firm. Alternatively, they may leave university and either form their own company or join an established one.

The fact that so many academics have had to make this choice in recent years has opened up the old debate about the relationship between academics and industr~ - a debate with implications for individual research workers, depart- ments, universities and indeed industry itself. The arguments involved are emotive ones and have been resurrected by most of the correspondents in this issue.

Traditionally a gulf has separated research workers in academia and industry, as George Poste points out (p. 133) - a gulf due in part to personal experience and in part to ignorance. Un- questionably academics have been large- ly responsible for its creation. Many have long been critical of the research done in most industrial laboratories. Their prime concern has been with the pursuit of knowledge (basic research), often done with no applied end in mind. Industrial research directed towards profitable products, they have argued, seriously limits the individual's research

options and restricts the free interchange of results and ideas with other investiga- tors - a state of affairs anathema to most academics 3. Industrial researchers on the other hand justifiably accuse some academics of intellectual arrogance and naivety about the real world, in particular about the many problems (intellectual, practical and financial) that are encountered in bringing results from the research laboratory to the market- place. They are also critical of what they see as a lack of direction in much of academic research.

These shortcomings are on the whole admitted by the correspondents in this issue who have left academic life for industry. In general they have been greatly impressed by what they have found there: the facilities, the com- parative absence of red tape and the speed with which practicalities, such as laboratory buildings, can be achieved - a contrast with the slow reaction time of university authorities and government agencies. The conviction is expressed that industry alone has the wide range of skills, as well as the finance needed to convert promising ideas and discoveries into products which would benefit humanity - an appealing aim, in at least one case, after years of admitted 'aca- demic self-indulgence'. Industrial lab- oratories, Poste believes, with their diverse skills and substantial resources, will move to the forefront of research in biomedical science in the next decade, eliminating the barriers that separate them from academia.

Forward together Fortunately these barriers are already

being lowered. The recent cuts in public funding have engendered a new realism in academia. Researchers recognize that state support on the scale of the 1960s and early 1970s will not come again: a failure of political will, allied to an economy that is at best fitfully healthy, will see to that in most countries. As a consequence a greater accord with industry will be necessary. This will undoubtedly involve a degree of compromise on the part of academic research workers though this may not be so great as is generally believed (as Poste emphasizes, p. 133).

The wind of change is already mani- fest. Ways of improving industry- academia relationships are being studied at a high level in several countries. Certain universities, particularly in the U K and the USA, are encouraging individual staff members to collaborate with industry. They may accept direct funds for research, the industrial sponsor getting first option on any discovery of commercial potential, or simply take on

Immunology Today, vol. 4, No. 5, 1983 139

contract research. Some universities have also encouraged the establishment of science-based companies near their campuses. Others have depar tments or staff members specifically to promote industrial liaison and to advise on the many legal and financial implications that collaborations with industry may involve.

Along with the above developments there are new signs, in the U K at least, that the Government appears to have recognized the shortcomings of its recent policy on university funding. It is providing additional funds for 230 'new blood' appointments 4 and has also established a number of posts in bio- technology. The Medical Research Council and the Royal Society have also introduced schemes to support active research groups or promising in- dividuals whose research has been threatened by the decline in support from the University Grants Commit tee 5. Such measures (though welcome) will in no way repair the ravages on manpower and morale, but may slow the decline.

But the relationship between academia and industry can be improved in other ways; these necessitate a generosity of spirit rather than of purse. There must be a greater dialogue between universities and industry and more interchange of staff between the two - more academics holding dual appointments or consultancies (as in the USA), more students taking sandwich courses and graduates getting industrial experience before taking postgraduate courses 6. Universities p lanning certain undergraduate courses and post- graduate training programmes should also give more consideration to the needs of industry in the interests of their students' future. They should also more frequently run top-up, conversion and post-experience courses of both a theo- retical and practical nature 6. Industry in turn should more effectively remind aca- demics of the kinds of graduates it requires and improve its s tanding among academics by sponsoring more enthusi- astically research studentships, post- graduate courses and scientific meetings.

As others have suggested (Bach and Thornton, p.125, and Ref. 6) learned societies and professional bodies also have a role to play. They usually represent widely diverse interests from academia and industry and generally speaking they have a reputat ion for fair play. They can offer wise counsel on ways of promoting a better under- standing between academia and in- dustry, advising on areas where mutual collaboration is desirable, and organiz- ing seminars and meetings on topics of

joint interest. They can also moni tor the effects of this changing relationship.

Industrial concerns are now involving themselves more deeply in basic research problems which used to be the exclusive domain of academics. Nevertheless, they are extremely anxious that academic research survives. Industry recognizes that universities supply both the recruits for their work-force and many of the innovations on which their own future depends. Indeed there are even those in industry (as well as academia) who warn of dangers if academia becomes too dependent upon industrial support (A. Williamson, cited on p. 128); they believe that this would impair the inde- pendence of the very research base which generated so many of the real break- throughs of the 1970s and 1980s. As stressed by others, the pr imary require- ment may be not so much for an in- creased partnership between academia and industry but for an increased under- s tanding of each other 's roles that will s trengthen co-operation between the two (see Fusfeld in Ref. 3).

C o n c l u d i n g c o m m e n t s

Attitudes are changing but it is obvious that certain doubts and suspicions remain 3. Problems will arise - some anticipated, some new. We are advised to face up to these problems, to discuss them openly rather than retreat

to our former position (R. Jefferis, p. 130). It is also in the interests of the many people receiving academic training in immunology and other biomedical sciences that when qualified they may be respectfully employed doing something which might ultimately benefit humanity. In seeking this new partner- ship we must not overlook the raison d'itre of the universities and their pr imary obligation to foster an environment conducive to free enquiry. Finally the main reason for harnessing the new tech- nologies is to enrich the lives of ordinary people 7. Let us hope that ordinary people will be able to afford the solutions when they come.

R e f e r e n c e s

1 Redfearn, J. (1981) Nature (London) 290, 285 2 Wright, P. The Times, 18June 1982 3 Peterson, I. (1983) Sci. News Lett. 123, 76-77 4 University Grants Committee (1983) Circular

Letter 1/83, Ref 2034/073 5 Anon. (1982)Nature(London)300, 7-8 6 The Royal Society (1981) Biotechnology and

Education - The Report of a Workshop Group 7 Hoyle, D., quoted in The Scotsman, 19 August

1982

Keith James is in the Department of Surgery, University of Edinburgh, UK, and is Education Secretary of the British Society for Immunology. With one of his collaborators, Dr D. B. L.

McClelland, he recently stgned a research agreatu~t with a leading British biotechnology company.

Emplg_loyment o p p g r t u n i t i e s i n indus t ry_

Where the jobs have been The following firms have since 1981 recruited s ta f fwi th experience of

immunology or immunological techniques. The current accuracy of the informat ion given has been checked but cannot be guaranteed. Nor can the completeness of the list. We will gladly publish at a later date any

amendmen t s or addit ions to this list brought to our attention.

Abbott Laboratories American Qualex Battele Columbus North Chicago 14620 Firestone Boulevard Laboratories IL 60064 USA La Mirada 505 King Avenue

CA 90638 USA Columbus Advanced Biotechnologies Inc OH 43201 USA 12150 Tech Road AMGen Silver Spring 1900 Oak Terrace Lane Becton Dickinson MD 20904 USA Thousand Oaks Immunodiagnostics

CA 91320 USA Mountain View Avenue Agrigenetics Corporation Orangeburg

NY 10962 USA 5649 East Buckeye Road Amoco Research Center Madison EI 33716 USA PO Box 400 Becton Dickinson Research

Naperville Center IL 60566 USA PO Box 12016 Allelix Inc

6850 Goreway Drive Research Triangle Park Mississauga Antibodies Incorporated NC 27709 USA Ontario Canada PO Box 1560 L4V IPI Davis Bioclone Ltd

CA 95617 USA 3 Hockney Road Alpha Therapeutic Bradford BD8 9HQ UK Corporation Armos Corporation Biogen SA 5555 Valley Blvd 180 Kimball Way 46 Rte des Acaxias Los Angeles South San Francisco 1226 Carouge CA 90032 USA CA 94080 USA Geneva Switzerland