The Impact of the Wakeham Report

The June 24, 2010 Wakeham Report by Sir Bill Wakeham, who was the former vice-chancellor of the University of Southampton, advised funding constraints in the realm of higher education.

In the year, 2011, the question remains one of “how to implement the efficiency savings recommended in the Wakeham Report as well as achieve the required additional savings whilst ensuring the sustainability of the research base.” 

It becomes a matter of setting research priorities. Balancing a budget on any academic level presents a challenge. In terms of higher education involving ongoing academic research, it can present an even greater challenge involving a number of factors including the anticipated or projected total cost of research, the actual cost of research, proposed research income versus actual research income and/or proposed or actual research income deficit. Then of course, there is always the unexpected.

Were the recommended cutbacks in the Wakeham Report of 2010 justified?

“The report by Sir Bill Wakeham, former vice-chancellor of the University of Southampton, recommends that institutions make annual efficiency savings of 5 per cent from the indirect costs of research - covering areas such as libraries and administration - for the next three years. That would add up to savings of £40 million a year for the research councils by 2013-14, along with a potential £40 million for other research funders. Funding constraints mean higher education must find "economies in the overall costs of research", Sir Bill says in the report, which was published on 24 June.” 

The first reaction to the proposed cutbacks in research funding, was by those engaged in ongoing, academic research projects. Many of them objected vociferously and possibly rightly so, where funding cutbacks might have affected their ongoing, research projects.  

The value and merit of research always sits in a finely tuned balance, weighed against its ultimate cost. Until the actual research is complete, the value and merit of the work that is in progress is unknown.  It remains in the realm of speculation. Many of their projects were in that stage of development, at that time and thus, were in a precarious position. Research is an ongoing process in which one project builds on another and what affects one project may well affect others.

The impact of the Wakeham Report around the world was alarming.

Many students panicked immediately because the perceived cost of higher education was already reaching or exceeding the realm of possibility for them. Severe cutbacks in research grants could have ended their academic careers.

Were the research cutback protests justified?     

Note that any formal or informal protest tending towards riots on a mass scale, is not necessarily justified, even though it may seem to be so to those who are protesting non-aggressively or aggressively, at any time.   

An article by John Morgan on June 24, 2010, entitled “The 5 percent savings solution” published on the Times Higher Education website, uses the words ‘efficiencies’ and ‘research concentration’…” 

One must suggest that in the year 2011, the seven, UK Research Councils are still actively engaged in the position of implementing ongoing transition oriented in this direction, regardless of academic or non-academic protests.

Academic transition never comes without a certain degree of opposition and probably never will, as it is subject to public scrutiny and the masses normally fear change. That has been true since the beginning of history. Unfortunately, not all those who object to change are able to comprehend what is actually involved in the research process. These same individuals often benefit from research success, even thought they have fought against it all the way.

This is the nature of progress in the academic world. Changes in research are also subject to the global economy, like many other realms of inquiry.

The Wakeham Report leads to a three-year project and will likely proceed beyond then, even with the objections of those who choose to protest research-funding cutbacks.

The bottom line becomes one of a choice between appropriate research-funding cutbacks, in the light of the current global economic situation or the possibility of the elimination of research, which is not a viable option.

Academic research within the setting of appropriate priorities is the most realistic option. Results have to be viable in research in order to justify its funding.

‘Efficiencies’ and ‘research concentration’ are already the new priorities.