DOCSLIB.ORG

Health Innovation: Breathing Life Into the Northern Powerhouse ABOUT the AUTHOR Luke Raikes Is a Research Fellow at IPPR

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Health Innovation: Breathing Life Into the Northern Powerhouse ABOUT the AUTHOR Luke Raikes Is a Research Fellow at IPPR REPORT HEALTH INNOVATION BREATHING LIFE INTO THE NORTHERN POWERHOUSE Luke Raikes November 2016 © IPPR North 2016 Institute for Public Policy Research ABOUT IPPR NORTH SUPPORTED BY IPPR North is IPPR’s dedicated thinktank for the North of England. With its head office in Manchester and representatives in Newcastle, IPPR North’s research, together with our stimulating and varied events programme, seeks to produce innovative policy ideas for fair, democratic and sustainable communities across the North of England. IPPR’s purpose is to conduct and promote research into, and the education of the public in, the economic, social and political sciences, science and technology, the voluntary sector and social enterprise, Established in 2011, NHSA Ltd represents the eight public services, and industry and commerce. research-intensive universities (also known as the N8), eight research-intensive NHS teaching trusts and four IPPR North academic health science networks (AHSNs), and works 13th Floor, City Tower to promote and partner the North with international Piccadilly Plaza, Manchester M1 4BT clinical research in the public and private sector. T: +44 (0)161 694 9680 E: [email protected] www.ippr.org/north Registered charity no: 800065 (England and Wales), SC046557 (Scotland). This paper was first published in November 2016. © 2016 The contents and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author only. IDEAS to CHANGE LIVES CONTENTS Summary ................................................................................................ 3 1. Introduction and context .................................................................... 6 1.1 The strengths of the northern health science sector ...................... 6 1.2 The Northern Independent Economic Review ................................ 7 1.3 The northern powerhouse and place-based industrial strategy ...... 7 1.4 The health science sector – an overview ........................................ 9 2. Rapid growth: the North’s health science industry .......................... 11 2.1 Biopharmaceuticals and medical technologies: core and supply chain .................................................................. 11 2.2 Comparative advantage ............................................................... 13 2.3 Exports ........................................................................................ 16 3. Size and scale: public investment in health science ....................... 18 3.1 NHS profile in the North ............................................................... 18 3.2 Economic impact of health spending ........................................... 19 4. Global expertise: clinical and health research ................................. 21 4.1 Health science research ............................................................... 21 4.2 Investment in northern research ................................................... 23 4.3 Universities .................................................................................. 26 5. Opportunities: clusters and collaborations ...................................... 28 5.1 Clusters of innovation .................................................................. 28 5.2 Economic assets and talent pool ................................................. 30 5.3 Research expertise and opportunity ............................................ 32 5.4 innovation and collaboration ........................................................ 34 5.5 Devolution .................................................................................... 36 6. Challenges ........................................................................................ 38 6.1 Public investment in research ...................................................... 38 6.2 FDI and international profile ......................................................... 39 6.3 Brexit ........................................................................................... 39 6.4 Poor transport connectivity ......................................................... 40 7. Conclusions and recommendations ................................................. 42 References ........................................................................................... 44 1 IPPR North | Health innovation: Breathing life into the northern powerhouse ABOUT THE AUTHOR Luke Raikes is a research fellow at IPPR. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank Ed Cox (director of IPPR North) and Anna Round (senior research fellow at IPPR North) for their valuable input and advice throughout the project. He would especially like to thank Hakim Yadi and the NHSA for sponsoring this research. Download This document is available to download as a free PDF and in other formats at: http://www.ippr.org/publications/health-innovation-breathing-life-into-the-northern-powerhouse Citation If you are using this document in your own writing, our preferred citation is: Raikes L (2016) Health innovation: Breathing life into the northern powerhouse, IPPR North. http://www.ippr.org/publications/health-innovation-breathing-life-into-the-northern-powerhouse Permission to share This document is published under a creative commons licence: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/ For commercial use, please contact [email protected] 2 IPPR North | Health innovation: Breathing life into the northern powerhouse SUMMARY 60-SECOND SUMMARY Health science is one of the four most dynamic and productive sectors in the northern economy. The sector comprises fast-growing, private sector companies in pharmaceuticals, medtech and digital health with strong exports to Europe and beyond, combined with global expertise in clinical and health research led by northern universities and hospitals. These sectors are inextricably linked to public health systems employing over half a million people. Their strengths are brought together in interconnected, place-based clusters that stretch across the North’s geography, from Liverpool’s world leading infectious disease expertise, Manchester and Cheshire’s health technology and pharmaceuticals corridors, through to Leeds’s and Yorkshire’s thriving health technology and advanced manufacturing sector, to the North East’s world-leading hub for ageing, innovation and bio-processing. However, to maximise the potential of northern health innovation, the government’s new industrial strategy must tackle a number of challenges posed by existing patterns of research funding, the consequences of Brexit, and the ongoing problems of transport connectivity and skills retention. We make three key proposals: a place-based approach to industrial strategy for the health science sector; catch-up capital for research funding; and a series of more local interventions to keep health sciences at the cutting edge of northern productivity. KEY FINDINGS The health science sector is one of the four ‘prime capabilities’ for an industrial strategy in the North of England identified in the 2016 Northern Independent Economic Review (NIER). The NIER found that numerous areas in the North have significant specialisms in subsectors such as pharmaceuticals, life sciences, medical devices and technologies, and wider healthcare services. This report builds on the review in two ways: • first, it makes a closer investigation into the strengths and specialisms that characterise the health science sector in the North and identifies the precise nature of their productivity potential • second, it explores how this potential can be nurtured in the context of the new government’s drive for a place-based industrial strategy. Health sciences ‘strand’ Productivity ‘potential’ Biopharmaceuticals Rapid growth Medical technologies Clinical & health research Clustering & Global collaboration Universities expertise Healthcare services Size & scale 3 IPPR North | Health innovation: Breathing life into the northern powerhouse The health science sector can be subdivided into five separate strands of interlinked activity. The North has particular strengths relating to each of these strands, each with its own type of ‘productivity potential’ as illustrated in the above diagram. Clustering and collaboration The overall potential of the health science sector in the North cannot be captured by exploring the specialisms of its subsectors in isolation. The real strength in northern health sciences lies in its more place- based clusters, their local assets, and the interrelationships between them. These are exemplified in the following clusters. • Manchester and Cheshire life sciences corridors, which combine the assets in Alderley Park – originally a large AstraZeneca site but now home to over 150 small biotech firms; many spin-offs from the University of Manchester; the Health E-Research Centre (HeRC); the Antimicrobial Resistance Centre; Precision Medicine Catapult Node; Salford Lung Study; and the new Medicines Discovery Catapult. • This is linked in turn with the Liverpool city-region’s biologics cluster, with the world-renowned Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and Europe’s largest biologic manufacturing clusters in Speke. • In the North East, the universities of Newcastle and Durham have developed an international reputation for work on ageing and photonics, while Darlington is host to the Biologics Factory of the Future and the National Biologics Manufacturing Centre. • In Yorkshire and the Humber there is a strong medtech cluster with key medical equipment, prosthetics and tissue repair manufacturers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Landscape Analysis
    The UK’s research and innovation infrastructure: Landscape Analysis 3 Contents Executive summary 6 Chapter 1: Introduction 8 1.1 Scope and definition of research and innovation infrastructure 9 1.2 Infrastructure diversity 10 1.3 Scale and coverage 11 1.4 Questionnaire methodology, limitations and potential bias 13 Chapter 2: Overview of the landscape 15 2.1 The cross-disciplinary nature of infrastructures 17 2.2 Large scale multi-sector facilities 18 Chapter 3: Lifecycle 21 3.1 Concept 22 3.2 Current lifecycle landscape 23 3.3 Evolution of the landscape 26 3.4 Lifecycle and planning 26 Chapter 4: International collaboration and cooperation 28 4.1 International collaboration 29 4.2. Staffing 29 4.3 International user base 30 Chapter 5: Skills and staffing 32 5.1 Numbers 33 5.2 Roles 36 5.3 Staff diversity 36 Chapter 6: Operations 38 6.1 Set-up capital costs 39 6.2 Sources of funding 41 6.3 Primary funding source 42 Chapter 7: Measuring usage and capacity 43 7.1 Usage 44 7.2 Measuring capacity 45 7.3 Managing capacity 47 7.4 Barriers to performance 49 Chapter 8: Links to the economy 52 8.1 Working with businesses 53 Chapter 9: Biological sciences, health and food sector 56 9.1 Current landscape 57 9.2 Interdependency with e-infrastructure 63 9.3 Engagement with the wider economy 63 4 Chapter 10: Physical sciences and engineering sector 65 10.1 The current landscape 67 10.2 Characterising the sector 69 10.3 The importance of international collaboration 71 10.4 Impacts 71 Chapter 11: Social sciences, arts and humanities sector 73 11.1 Form
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Newcastle University Economic Impact Report
    ECONOMIC IMPACT REPORT Our economic impact Engagement Our and partnerships Students International Knowledge profile economy Business Research and engagement innovation Excellence with a Purpose CONTENTS Overview 1 Foreword 2 Our economic impact 5 Our students 6 Knowledge economy 8 Research and innovation 9 Business engagement 10 International profile 12 Engagement and partnerships 14 Case studies: 1: Rural sustainability 16 2: City futures 17 3: Employer engagement 18 4: Partnering with business 19 5: Showcasing creativity 20 The Economic Impact 1 of Newcastle University OVERVIEW Newcastle University was formally established in 1963, but can trace its roots to the School of Medicine and Surgery, which was founded in Newcastle upon Tyne in 1834. Today’s University is a thriving international community of 27,750 students and 5,780 staff, the majority of whom are based on our main city-centre campus and other sites around the city. In recent years, we have expanded our footprint to include two international campuses, in Malaysia and Singapore, which opened in 2011 and 2008 respectively, while our newest branch campus, Newcastle University London, opened in September 2015. The University is a member of the internationally renowned Russell Group, an association of 24 leading research-intensive universities in the UK, and of the N8 Research Partnership, which features the eight research-intensive universities in the North of England. We are ranked among the top 1% of world universities, according to the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World Rankings. In 2016, Newcastle became one of only 16 universities in the world, and one of two in the UK, to achieve Five Plus QS Stars in the first international assessment of its kind.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 N8/Yorkshire Universities Joint Response to David
    N8/YORKSHIRE UNIVERSITIES JOINT RESPONSE TO DAVID SWEENEY The N8 Research Partnership and Yorkshire Universities (YU) together represent 17 higher education institutions (HEIs) in the north of England. Our members make major contributions towards the UK’s research and innovation base. They are also critical institutions in supporting local and regional development, and act as key anchor institutions underpinning place-making in many cities, towns and communities across the north. We welcome the questions posed by David Sweeney, Executive Chair of Research England, in his recent blog for WonkHE1. This joint response by N8 and YU represents a contribution to the important debate about the role of place in research and innovation policy, strategy and funding in the UK. Executive Summary: • Research capacity and funding is not sufficiently spatially distributed in the UK. This reinforces imbalances and inequalities in the UK economy, and is an opportunity cost for UK Productivity and R&D targets. • In order to address this, there needs to be a greater emphasis on place and developing regional R&I ecosystems, which engage partners in the public and private sectors, as well as local citizens; • Definitions of excellence should be reviewed reflecting value of collaborative research which is locally embedded and impactful. Conventional peer review methods, which are accustomed to traditional measures of excellence, may need to be reviewed for funding schemes for which other factors are also strategically important; • Programmes should not be one-size fits all, but informed by regional knowledge. The approach should be flexible and long-term; • To make transformational change, SIPF awards could usefully be significantly larger and longer in duration; • Building capacity and local knowledge could be supported by developing new place-based collaborative research models, disseminating knowledge and informing policy.
    [Show full text]
  • London: an Innovation Hub for Health & Life Sciences Through
    LONDON: AN INNOVATION HUB FOR HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF DATA AND AI SUPPORTED BY Next page Access the market: 19 from NHS to Biopharma CONTENTS Foreword 3 The NHS adoption of AI technologies 20 This is an interactive guide, London’s key strengths 4 l Spotlight on UCLPartners 21 so click on the title to jump to any section. An Innovative Biopharma Cluster 22 An ecosystem built for growth 5 l Case study - MultiplAI 23 Access to funding 6 Government support 7 An accessible, diverse 24 l Case study - Kheiron Medical 9 and data-rich environment Diverse population and data 24 London’s life sciences clusters 10 Partner with the Health Data 25 The Knowledge Quarter 11 Research Hubs Whitechapel: Barts Life Sciences Hub 12 l Spotlight on DATA-CAN HDR 26 White City Innovation District 13 Southbank to Sutton 14 London’s resilient COVID-19 response 27 l Case study - InstaDeep 28 Talent and educational excellence 15 Existing talent 16 How can we help 29 The next generation 17 How London & Partners can support 29 l Case study - PEP Health 18 How MedCity can support 29 2 Contents page FOREWORD COVID-19 has accelerated data-driven innovation across often siloed organisations. Similarly, policy is being the globe, with artificial intelligence and data science at developed to overcome legacy systems and regulations, the forefront of addressing human disease and health. which will underpin and speed up innovations. The coronavirus pandemic has led to increased acceptance of new technologies with strong buy-in from all corners Not only can bioinformatics and use of healthcare Allen Simpson Neelam Patel data lead to better health systems and outcomes, this of the life sciences and healthcare sector determined to CEO also has the potential to create many new jobs Acting CEO keep this momentum going.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Review of the Scottish Funding Council's Research
    Independent Review of the Scottish Funding Council’s Research Pooling Initiative Chaired by Professor Louise Heathwaite CBE FRSE Contents page Preface Executive summary 1. Introduction 2. The review process 3. Brief background to the Research Pooling Initiative 4. The evidence base 5. Evidence analysis 6. Conclusions and recommendations 7. List of advisory panel members 8. Appendices 2 Preface by Professor Louise Heathwaite CBE FRSE I was delighted to be asked by Mike Cantlay OBE (Chair of the Scottish Funding Council, SFC) and Professor Lesley Yellowlees CBE (Chair of SFC’s Research and Knowledge Exchange Committee, RKEC) to lead this independent review of the Research Pooling Initiative (RPI). Scotland’s major investment in, and long-term commitment to growing critical mass and driving collaboration across its core science disciplines was prescient and has been copied widely elsewhere. Since 2005, SFC has invested over £155m in eleven research pools, matched by over £330m from Scottish Universities and co-funding of almost £10m from the Office for Science & Technology and the Chief Scientist’s Office. Given the continued evolution of the research landscape in Scotland and the UK, now is a good time to evaluate whether the concept of research pooling remains fit for purpose. My remit was to undertake a high-level and summative analysis to establish the impact of SFC's investment in the pooling initiative on the Scottish research environment to date and to provide recommendations on the development of this and SFC’s future investment in research. I am hugely grateful to every member of my Advisory Panel for their valuable guidance and critical insight throughout the review process and particularly for their fortitude and good humour during the oral evidence sessions when the days were very long indeed.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report for 2018-19
    Yorkshire Universities 2018-19 Annual Report and Accounts yorkshireuniversities.ac.uk YorkshireUnis Reference and administrative details for the year ended 31 July 2019 Registered office: 22 Clarendon Place, Leeds, LS2 9JY Registered company number: 03467035 Registered charity number: 1109200 Independent examiner: Mark Heaton FCCA DChA KM Chartered Accountants 1st Floor Block C The Wharf Manchester Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 1JG Bankers: Unity Trust Bank plc Nine Brindley Place Birmingham West Midlands B1 2HB Cambridge & Counties Bank Charnwood Court 5B New Walk Leicester LE1 6TE Manchester Building Society 125 Portland Street Manchester M1 4QD CONTENTS Chair’s foreword .................................................................................................................... 1 Statement of trustees’ responsibilities ................................................................................... 2 Governance, structure and risk management ........................................................................ 3 Mission ................................................................................................................................. 5 Objectives and achievements ............................................................................................... 5 Future plans ........................................................................................................................ 10 Financial review .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Making the Best Better
    MAKING THE BEST BETTER UK Research and Innovation More efficient and effective for the global economy Report for Department of Business, Innovation and Skills By Sarah Jackson On secondment from the N8 Research Partnership 30 March 2013 1 MAKING THE BEST BETTER UK Research and Innovation More efficient and effective for the global economy The purpose of this report is to document and analyse evidence of the efficiencies within the higher education research base. The evidence has been collected from existing reports and data, combined with new case studies. Providing recommendations for future efficiency savings is explicitly outside the scope of this work. Key highlights and conclusions The higher education sector is moving towards a ten year track record of delivering efficiencies, including headline savings of over £1.38bn over CSRs 2004 and 20071, and Research Councils delivering savings of £428m over the current CSR period. These efficiencies have been achieved using two key drivers: a. Increasing domestic and international competition b. Science ring fence, allowing reinvestment of savings to increase world class performance of universities. The evidence collected for this report shows a strong ten-year track record of institutions delivering both operational and productive efficiencies, which is improving research and teaching. This strong link between driving efficiencies and improving student experience and better research is increasing investment in skills, knowledge and human capital. Capital budgets are being utilised more effectively, primarily through creating clusters of excellence and sharing equipment. This is delivering state-of-the-art facilities, enabling new science and better equipment and expertise for business. The increased effectiveness of the system is delivering both greater outputs for science and research, and also greater impact in the global marketplace: generating new knowledge, leveraging private investment in R&D and increasing the quality of human capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Enterprising Universities Using the Research Base to Add Value to Business
    Policy Report September 2010 Enterprising Universities Using the research base to add value to business 1100901_EnterprisingUniversities.indd00901_EnterprisingUniversities.indd A 009/09/20109/09/2010 115:025:02 The 1994 Group > The 1994 Group is established to promote excellence in university research and teaching. It represents 19 of the UK’s leading research-intensive, student focused universities. Around half of the top 20 universities in UK national league tables are members of the group. > Each member institution delivers an extremely high standard of education, demonstrating excellence in research, teaching and academic support, and provides learning in a research-rich community. > The 1994 Group counts amongst its members 12 of the top 20 universities in the Guardian University Guide 2011 league tables published on the 8th June 2010. 7 of the top 10 universities for student experience are 1994 Group Universities (2009 National Student Survey). In 17 major subject areas 1994 Group universities are the UK leaders achieving 1st place in their fi eld (THE RAE subject rankings 2008). 57% of the 1994 Group's research is rated 4* 'world- leading' or 3* 'internationally excellent' (RAE 2008, HEFCE). > The 1994 Group represents: University of Bath, Birkbeck University of London, Durham University, University of East Anglia, University of Essex, University of Exeter, Goldsmiths University of London, Institute of Education University of London, Royal Holloway University of London, Lancaster University, University of Leicester, Loughborough
    [Show full text]
  • Life Sciences Sector Deal 2 Industrial Strategy Life Sciences Sector Deal 2 Foreword
    Industrial Strategy Life Sciences Sector Deal 2 Industrial Strategy Life Sciences Sector Deal 2 Foreword Last year the Life Sciences develops to encourage and spread Sector Deal set out the first these new technologies. Advanced phase of implementing the Life therapies are making precision Sciences Industrial Strategy medicines, targeted to the individual patient, a reality here in the UK. through joint commitments between the government This second Life Sciences Sector Rt Hon Greg Clark MP and the sector to invest in the Deal deepens our partnership with industry, universities and charities and United Kingdom’s life sciences Secretary of State for Business, demonstrates how the NHS is pivotal as Energy and Industrial Strategy landscape. a delivery partner. It contains significant The agreements made in the first action to address the Industrial Strategy deal capitalised on the enormous Grand Challenges and our mission to opportunities for growth that the life transform the prevention, diagnosis sciences sector presents for the UK. and treatment of chronic diseases by We are seeing a continual flow of new 2030: it will support the creation of a investments across the health tech cohort of healthy participants that will and pharmaceutical sectors since the enable research into the hidden signs deal was published, with this year’s of disease and ways of diagnosing Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP second deal seeing more life sciences diseases early when interventions Secretary of State for companies investing in the UK and and treatments can be the most Health and Social Care creating high-quality, well-paid jobs. effective. The cohort will involve the public, the research community and Life sciences is a sector that operates industry with the results benefiting at the cutting-edge of technological the whole health service – an example developments.
    [Show full text]
  • The British Innovation Fund Investing in the Best of UK University Venturing
    The British Innovation Fund Investing in the Best of UK University Venturing For discussion purposes with Professional Investors only 2Q 2020 BRITISH INNOVATION FUND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key Areas of Specialty: Agricultural Bio- Technologies technology The BIF has been backed by some of The BIF is managed in the leading local The British Innovation partnership with government pension Deep Tech Life Sciences Milltrust International LLP Fund (BIF) is an schemes in the and Milltrust Agricultural AIFMD-compliant United Kingdom patient capital venture Investments, and supported by an capital fund investing in cutting edge spin- Alternative Advisory team of Nano Tech investment specialists outs emanating from Protein and agricultural and leading UK university research. scientific experts. 2 INVESTMENT PREMISE “Exploration is the engine that drives innovation. Innovation drives economic growth.” - Edith Widder 3 INVESTMENT PREMISE A BRIEF HISTORY OF BRITISH INNOVATION Sir Isaac Newton, PRS 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1726 Sir Alexander Fleming, FRS FRSE FRCS English mathematician, physicist, astronomer, 6 August 1881 – 11 March 1955 theologian, and author widely recognised as one of the Scottish biologist, physician, micro-biologist, most influential scientists of all time and as a key figure and pharmacologist. Inventor of Penicillin. in the scientific revolution. Edward Jenner, FRS FRCPE FLS John Logie Baird, FRSE 17 May 1749 – 26 January 1823 13 August 1888 – 14 June 1946 English physician who was a contributor to the Scottish engineer and innovator. One of the inventors of development of the smallpox vaccine. the mechanical television. Michael Faraday, FRS 22 September 1791 – 25 August 1867 John Adrian Shepherd-Barron, OBE English scientist who contributed to the study 23 June 1925 – 15 May 2010 of electromagnetism and electrochemistry.
    [Show full text]
  • New Fonts Strand 5 Hudson Report Layout 1
    New Fonts Strand 5 Hudson Report:Layout 1 13/09/2011 09:09 Page a N8 Research Partnership The impacts of demographic change in the functional economies of the North of England Summary Report Ray Hudson Durham University with Lisa Buckner University of Leeds Tom Cannon University of Liverpool Alan Harding University of Manchester Kasia Kurowska Newcastle University Philip Rees University of Leeds New Fonts Strand 5 Hudson Report:Layout 1 13/09/2011 09:09 Page b New Fonts Strand 5 Hudson Report:Layout 1 13/09/2011 09:09 Page i N8 Research Partnership The impacts of demographic change in the functional economies of the North of England Summary Report Ray Hudson Durham University Contact author: Ray Hudson Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Partnerships and Engagement), Durham University, University Office, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP, UK Telephone: +44 (0)191 334 6045 Email: [email protected] New Fonts Strand 5 Hudson Report:Layout 1 13/09/2011 09:09 Page ii About the N8 The N8 is a group of the eight most research intensive universities in the North — Durham, Lancaster, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield and York. All N8 universities are ranked in the top 200 of the World University Rankings. Combined, the N8 universities have 125 “top 10” subject rankings in the UK (RAE 2008). The N8 partnership was created in 2007, establishing virtual research centres in Regenerative Medicine and Molecular Engineering. It was a novel way of creating a confluence of research assets and capabilities across the partnership, with sufficient scale and critical mass, to move on broader industrial and commercial opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • A CRITICAL PATH Securing the Future of Higher Education in England
    A CRITICAL PATH Securing the Future of Higher Education in England IPPR Commission on the Future of Higher Education 2013 1 IPPR RESEARCH STAFF Nick Pearce is director of IPPR. Rick Muir is associate director for public service reform at IPPR. Jonathan Clifton is a senior research fellow at IPPR. Annika Olsen is a researcher at IPPR. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Commissioners would like to thank Nick Pearce, Rick Muir, Jonathan Clifton and Annika Olsen for their help with researching and writing this report, and London Economics for modelling the higher education funding system. They would also like to thank those organisations and individuals who submitted evidence or agreed to be interviewed as part of this project. In particular, they would like to thank the staff and students who facilitated their learning visits to higher education institutions in Sheffield and Newcastle. They would also like to thank Jon Wilson, along with all those who organised and participated in the joint seminar series with King’s College London, and Marc Stears for his guidance in the early stages of the project. ABOUT IPPR IPPR, the Institute for Public Policy Research, is the UK’s leading progressive thinktank. We are an independent charitable organisation with more than 40 staff members, paid interns and visiting fellows. Our main office is in London, with IPPR North, IPPR’s dedicated thinktank for the North of England, operating out of offices in Newcastle and Manchester. The purpose of our work is to assist all those who want to create a society where every citizen lives a decent and fulfilled life, in reciprocal relationships with the people they care about.
    [Show full text]