DOCSLIB.ORG

The Northern Powerhouse in Health Health Science Alliance Ltd Research - a Science and Innovation Audit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Northern Powerhouse in Health Health Science Alliance Ltd Research - a Science and Innovation Audit The Northern Submitted by the Northern Powerhouse in Health Health Science Alliance Ltd Research - A Science and Innovation Audit Main Report June 2018 Prepared by: Prepared for: SDG Economic Development Submitted by the Northern Health 61 Mosley Street Science Alliance Ltd Manchester M2 3HZ C/O Weightmans LLP, Hardman Square No 1 Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB +44 161 261 9154 www.sdgED.com Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this material for Submitted by the Northern Health Science Alliance Ltd. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which Steer Davies Gleave has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made. The Northern Powerhouse in Health Research - A Science and Innovation Audit | Main Report Contents 1 Introduction to the North . and our SIA’s footprint .......................................................... 1 Headline Messages ....................................................................................................................... 1 Our Place in a Nutshell.................................................................................................................. 2 Science and Innovation Assets and Capabilities ........................................................................... 9 The Prize we offer ....................................................................................................................... 15 The focus of this Science and Innovation Audit.......................................................................... 15 2 Strengths in Science and Innovation .................................................................................. 17 Headline Messages ..................................................................................................................... 17 Excellence in Science and Research ............................................................................................ 17 Innovation Strengths, Growth Points, and Assets ...................................................................... 26 Assets, Recent Investments and Pipeline Activity ...................................................................... 31 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 38 3 Theme 1: Data for Better Health and Wealth ..................................................................... 39 Headline Messages ..................................................................................................................... 39 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 41 National and International trends and size of Global Markets .................................................. 41 Local Science and Innovation Assets .......................................................................................... 47 Local Science and Innovation Talent .......................................................................................... 57 National and International Engagement .................................................................................... 61 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 66 4 Theme 2: Precision Medicine ............................................................................................ 67 Headline Messages ..................................................................................................................... 67 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 69 National and International Trends and size of Global Markets .................................................. 71 Local Science and Innovation Assets .......................................................................................... 73 Local Science and Innovation Talent .......................................................................................... 83 National and International Engagement .................................................................................... 85 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 90 5 Understanding the Synergies - Data for Better Health and Wealth & Precision Medicine, together ........................................................................................................................... 91 June 2018 The Northern Powerhouse in Health Research - A Science and Innovation Audit | Main Report Headline Messages ..................................................................................................................... 91 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 92 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 102 6 Conclusions .....................................................................................................................103 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 103 Reviewing and revising our Hypotheses ................................................................................... 103 Logic for a Programme of Action at the level of the North ...................................................... 104 Targeted Opportunities ............................................................................................................ 109 Governance and Delivery Arrangements ................................................................................. 117 Figures Figure 1-1: Map of the Northern Powerhouse ............................................................................. 4 Figure 1-2: Premature (age <75 years) mortality for men plus women in the North and South of England, 1965–2015 ..................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 1-3: Excess mortality in the North compared with South of England by age group in four periods between 1965 and 2015 .................................................................................................. 8 Figure 1-4: Percentage of hours lost due to sickness absence rates by region ............................ 8 Figure 1-5: Clinical Trial Data for 2016-17 .................................................................................. 11 Figure 2-1: Location Quotient for relevant SIA theme areas in the North ................................. 28 Figure 2-2: Asset Map for the North East ................................................................................... 33 Figure 2-3: Asset Map for NPiHR: The North West .................................................................... 34 Figure 2-4: Asset Map for NPiHR: Yorkshire and The Humber ................................................... 35 Figure 3-1: Digital Maturity Assessment Scores, comparing UK averages with Northern Digital Exemplars ................................................................................................................................... 54 Figure 3-2: Location Quotient for Information and Communications in the North ................... 56 Figure 3-3: Research output versus research quality for advanced medical informatics, 2012-18 .................................................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 3-4: The relationship between national and international collaboration emphases for advanced medical informatics, 2012-18 ..................................................................................... 64 Figure 3-5: The relationship between international collaboration and quality of output for advanced medical informatics, 2012-18 ..................................................................................... 65 Figure 4-1: Location Quotient for Human Health and Social Work Activities in the North ........ 79 Figure 4-2: Location Quotient for Professional, Scientific and Technical Activities in the North .................................................................................................................................................... 80 June 2018 The Northern Powerhouse in Health Research - A Science and Innovation Audit | Main Report Figure 4-3: Location Quotient for Manufacturing in the North .................................................. 81 Figure 4-4: Leeds Precision Medicine Structure ......................................................................... 83 Figure 4-5: Research output versus research quality for Precision Medicine, 2012-18 ............. 84 Figure 4-6:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • High Performance Computing and BD
    High-Performance Computing and Big Data Challenge Dr Violeta Holmes Matthew Newall The University of Huddersfield Outline • High-Performance Computing – E-Infrastructure – Top500 -Tianhe-II – UoH experience: HPC resources and applications • Big Data – Hadoop – Case study: Close Call • Summary High-Performance Computing • The HPC and Big Data are new technologies vital for the advancement in science, business and industry. • ”High Performance Computing (HPC) and e- infrastructure in general are drivers of economic growth and societal well-being. They are also vital for maintaining international competitiveness in the generation of knowledge and its application.”(Kenway, Coveney, McGuire, Parchment, & Parsons, 2012) Where we were 50s-early 80s • Centralised computing facilities • Dummy Terminals • Punch cards • Batch Processing μ Processors • Allowed users to have “intelligent” machines under their table – Seen as an expensive typewriter – Few organisations and educational institutions had them • These machines were quickly overtaking Mainframes in price-performance factors, and later overtaking them in performance. 90s – early 2000 • Information on Demand - For the first time sharing and communicating became easy and quick. Where we are now • Efficient Multitasking Desktops • Capable Workstations • Mobile Devices – less capable Through the use of middlewares: • Clusters • Grids The 5th Utility Utility Computing/Cloud Computing/On- Demand Computing/Service Computing • The concept of just plugging in your problem into a computer system and getting results. • Defined as: “A large-scale distributed computing paradigm that is driven by economies of scale, in which a pool of abstracted virtualised, dynamically-scalable, managed computing power, storage, platforms and services are delivered on demand to external customers over the internet.” (Foster et al.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Intel Parallel Computing Centre – First Report the Hartree Centre
    Benefits of Leveraging Software Defined Visualization (OSPRay) Sergi Siso IPCC @ Hartree Centre, STFC Daresbury Laboratory United Kingdom Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 2 Index 1. Visualization Challenges in HPC 2. Ray tracing with OSPRay 3. Hands-On 1: Installing and using OSPRay 4. Remote Visualization with Paraview 5. Hand-One 2: Remote vis. of OpenCH and HVAC 6. Hartree Use Case 1: HVAC simulation 7. Hartree Use Case 2: IMAT Facility 8. Questions Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 3 Section 1 VISUALIZATION CHALLENGES IN HPC Why we need visualization in HPC “Yes," said Deep Thought, "I can do it.“ [Seven and a half million years later.... ] “The Answer to the Great Question... Of Life, the Universe and Everything... Is... Forty-two,' said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm.” Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 5 Why we need visualization in HPC Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 6 But not just rendering . In HPC visualization incudes: – Feature extraction – Isosurfaces / Isovolumes – Thresholding – Streamlines – Clip, Slice, gradient, … Some HPC visualization workloads are better suited to CPU . Visualization is a “big data” problem architectures. – Data movement problem (IO bottleneck) – Needs lots of memory – Need scalability to solve Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 7 Dataset Size Problem . Issues to simulate large datasets… May fit in System Memory but not in GPU memory PCI bus is slow Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 8 Rasterization Libraries OpenSWR vs MESA LLVMpipe Performance Comparison (drop in replacement for OpenGL) Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 9 Rasterization Libraries *Scientific Visualization in HPC presentation from Peter Messmer (NVIDIA) Thursday, 23 March 2017 Software Defined Visualization 10 In-Situ Visualization .
    [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]
  • 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]