Subject Overview, Sub-Panel 16; Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science

Transcription

1 Subject Overview, Sub-Panel 16; Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science General Analysis The sub-panel received 30 submissions from 29 institutions, one institution having made multiple submissions. Submissions comprised 1,231 staff of which 1,044 were Category A staff. 4,203 research outputs were included in the submissions, all of which were assessed as described in the Panel criteria and working methods. Where outputs were found to be outwith the UOA descriptor, or external advice was deemed desirable for confident assessment in detail, the sub-panel sought the view of other sub-panels and specialist advisors. The sub-panel was assisted in its assessment by 5 other sub-panels and by 38 specialist advisors. There was generic evidence of sustainability in terms of maintained levels of overall research income, a total of 2,168 doctoral degree awards across the assessment period, and 21 Research Fellows in place at the census date. The number and range of submissions reflected a sector that had maintained a significant and flexible research capacity throughout the assessment period. There was some evidence from incoming cross-referrals and institutional documentation that institutions had chosen to submit some cognate material under other units of assessment. Many submissions had a majority of outputs that were assessed as being of worldleading or internationally excellent quality. There was evidence of integration of research groupings within most submissions. Submissions, particularly from larger institutions, demonstrated good alignment between training, income generation, meeting beneficiary needs and exploiting innovation. Significant capital and human resource investment had been undertaken across the assessment period. Overall, the breadth and integration of submissions suggested that institutions were wellplaced to respond to challenges and opportunities within the sector and to develop multi-disciplinary programmes that would build effectively on basic biological knowledge The sub-panel recognized in the evidence from esteem and environment that the areas covered have demonstrated a very significant impact in the delivery of basic science and in the translation of scientific outcomes into both economic and policy benefits. The plurality of funding observed was considered a benefit both now and in the future, given the strategic importance of research areas within UOA16. There was evidence from esteem that a significant number of staff were regarded as international and national leaders in their fields. Many contributed to national and international funding bodies, to influential policy bodies and the commercial sector. 1

2 Discipline-based Overviews: Agricultural Science 16 Units containing Agricultural Science submitted to UOA16. A number of these also contained Food and/or Veterinary Science. Submissions ranged from 3-62 active researchers. 5 of them had fewer than 10 active researchers. Smaller submissions showed individual worker specialisms. The overall number of submissions was similar to The size of submissions varied widely. We felt that this variation had led to useful diversity and distinctiveness but recognised that small- and medium-sized entities needed to develop appropriate strategies and investment plans to foster collaboration and maintain sustainability. This was not apparent in all cases. The quality of outputs was high with almost 40% of the outputs scored as of internationally excellent or world-leading quality. This was enhanced by good evidence for broad-based income generation, good training delivery and close links to the beneficiary community. Investment in facilities and new staff was significant but not evenly spread across submissions. There was evidence from strategic statements and from some outputs that the sector was responding well to key challenges relating to sustainability, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and alternative land use. Although the balance of intra and interdisciplinary work remains weighted towards the former, there is evidence from programmes like The Rural Economy and Land Use Programme (RELU) that useful and appropriate integration is occurring. The sector has made good use of technologies developed elsewhere and there was evidence of awareness of the opportunities to deliver integrated economic and policy outputs which will be important for future developments, for example through the Living With Environmental Change (LWEC) partnership. The sub-panel found evidence of strong interdisciplinary work in some submissions. Specific attention should be directed to ensure that the integrative nature of agricultural science is balanced with disciplinary excellence. In order to ensure that the sector remains in a position to address emerging research issues, further moves during the next assessment period toward interdisciplinary approaches will become increasingly important. The sub-panel noted the need for greater emphasis on the links between social and natural sciences in several major areas of interest that were apparent in the submitted outputs and strategies. More emphasis would also be appropriate in developing the links between the growing emphasis on food, diet and health and the development of sustainable agricultural systems. The sub-panel expressed concern on the paucity of outputs covering work on 2

3 utilisation of farm wastes and other food chain wastes, and on numerical modelling of input transformations in agricultural systems. The potential for UK research to address the needs of developing countries remains under-exploited. Although the HEI sector is not the only UK supplier of research in Agricultural Science, the sector makes a significant international contribution to the subject. Food Science The sub-panel received submissions containing Food Science outputs, two of which were integrated in larger submissions containing Agriculture and/or Veterinary outputs reflecting the important role of food research in the whole food chain. Submissions ranged in size from 3 to 32 active researchers, with two having fewer than 10 researchers. Smaller submissions showed individual researcher specialisations. The number of submissions was reduced by three compared with The sub-panel felt that, in general, the individual submissions were well focussed. A diverse spread of research was submitted, reflecting the important multidisciplinary nature of the subject, and both applied and fundamental research featured in the world-leading outputs. The quality of outputs was high with almost half the outputs rated as being of world-leading or internationally excellent quality. Areas of particular strength included: o fundamental aspects of food microbiology in relation to the control of foodborne disease along the food chain o human nutrition (both applied and fundamental aspects) in relation to diet and health o food macromolecules and their relationship with functionality and food quality o molecular and perceptual aspects of taste and flavour o role of pre- and probiotics in diet and health Over the assessment period, research linked to diet and health had become more prominent showing the response of UK research to the increased national and international agenda. The sub-panel saw evidence in the outputs of progress being made since the 2001 assessment in sensory and consumer aspects of food. 3

4 While microbiology showed significant strengths, aspects of food spoilage was poorly represented in the outputs received by the sub-panel. Most of the food-related submissions showed significant interaction with national and global food companies which provided considerable industrial sponsorship. Whereas world-leading and internationally excellent research is being undertaken into the science underpinning many novel and traditional food processing operations, little research of high quality is being undertaken in the processing/engineering aspects to allow commercial exploitation of this work. The sub-panel observed through cross-referral that some research in this area was submitted to UOA26. Nevertheless, the submissions suggested that this research is badly under-represented in the UK science base and needs to be strengthened if the UK is to be competitive in this area. The environmental impact of food production (e.g. water usage, waste disposal and energy consumption) is a major issue which will grow further in significance over the next decade. Whilst pockets of excellence were found from the evidence of the submissions, the sub-panel considers it especially important to link to a greater extent research in food science, diet and health with sustainable approaches to primary agricultural production if the UK is to contribute appropriately and significantly to the international knowledge base in this area. Commendable collaboration between universities both within and without the sub-panel was also apparent and demonstrated the awareness of the need for multidisciplinary approaches to food-related issues. Although the HEI sector is not the only UK supplier of research in Food Science, the sector makes a major international contribution to the subject. Veterinary Science Inter- and multi-disciplinary approaches to veterinary science, especially relating to clinical veterinary medicine, were encouraged in both the previous RAE and the Selborne report. Investment decisions consistent with the recommendations of the Selborne Report had been implemented. 7 submissions pertaining to Veterinary Science were submitted to UOA16. Submissions ranged from active researchers. Approximately half the outputs therein were scored as world-leading or internationally excellent. A proportion of outputs had little or no primary relevance to veterinary science as described under the published UOA descriptor and UOA boundaries. The outputs from basic veterinary science were particularly strong with evidence of world-leading science with international impact. It was noted that 4

5 some submissions appeared to have specifically targeted the recruitment of new appointees in the basic science areas to enhance their internationally excellent research. Many of the outputs had a major focus on infectious disease. There was significant evidence of interdisciplinary research including biology, epidemiology, or genetics, in combination with engineering or mathematics and a good number of outputs emanated from multi-centric studies involving multiple veterinary faculties or schools. Substantial improvements in specialised buildings and facilities were evident. These included entire containment facilities, research facility buildings, imaging and proteomic suites. These facilities should ensure that the discipline is well placed to respond to animal catastrophes such as disease incursions. Many submissions presented clear commercialisation strategies with evidence of exploitation of IP relevant to national agendas and policies. It was noted that the duration of funding e.g. for Veterinary Training and Research Initiative was less than for the equivalent in human medicine. Long term support is required to ensure ongoing focus in recruitment and retention of veterinary researchers. One Medicine encompasses the interplay between veterinary and human medicine and provides a unique and expanding focus for veterinary science especially in the area of translational medicine and zoonotic diseases. It is an area of considerable opportunity for the future where the veterinary schools are well placed to provide leadership to the benefit of the common areas in veterinary and human medicine. The sub-panel would expect this funding to influence future outputs in this area. 5