Recommendations & Conclusions
8 items
5
Conclusion
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
Public support for R&D is not effectively designed to reach researchers and innovators that have not traditionally received large amounts of innovation funding – such as those in the regions. UKRI, the country’s biggest public innovation funder, has acknowledged the problem, but its new objectives are only the starting point …
Read more
Public support for R&D is not effectively designed to reach researchers and innovators that have not traditionally received large amounts of innovation funding – such as those in the regions. UKRI, the country’s biggest public innovation funder, has acknowledged the problem, but its new objectives are only the starting point in addressing the challenge. It is also disappointing to already see vast regional imbalances in the spending of recently-formed ARIA. (Conclusion, Paragraph 21)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly disagrees that funding to Golden Triangle institutions should be contingent on demonstrating economic impact elsewhere, but states it already considers both national and local impact when evaluating R&D investments to maximise impact across the UK.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
6
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
The Government should establish a portal where innovators can be matched with suitable funding and support to help them cut through the current tangle of options. Innovate UK should announce targets for increasing engagement with innovators across the country, using metrics such as outreach and targeted support, more accessible and …
Read more
The Government should establish a portal where innovators can be matched with suitable funding and support to help them cut through the current tangle of options. Innovate UK should announce targets for increasing engagement with innovators across the country, using metrics such as outreach and targeted support, more accessible and streamlined application processes, and additional support personnel in the regions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 22)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation for a new portal and Innovate UK targets, arguing that existing mechanisms are more effective. It highlights embedded regional considerations in innovation policy, roles of senior figures like the Northern Growth Envoy, and regular engagement between ministers, UKRI, and local …
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
20
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
In its response to this report, the Government should set out how it plans to support the establishment of a Northern Gritstone or Midlands Mindforge for every region of the UK. (Recommendation, Paragraph 61)
Government response AI summary
The government partially agrees but does not commit to establishing Northern Gritstone or Midlands Mindforge-like funds for every region, instead rejecting a mandate to the British Business Bank for this purpose and stating DSIT is exploring options for a broader R&D infrastructure investment framework.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
25
Conclusion
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
The Catapult network has the potential to help drive innovation and economic growth across the UK’s regions, but in regions with low R&D intensity and limited public investment, Catapults risk competing with local bodies for funds rather than fostering knowledge diffusion. (Conclusion, Paragraph 82)
Read more
The Catapult network has the potential to help drive innovation and economic growth across the UK’s regions, but in regions with low R&D intensity and limited public investment, Catapults risk competing with local bodies for funds rather than fostering knowledge diffusion. (Conclusion, Paragraph 82)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the committee's observation, stating it disagrees with the recommendation and referencing a substantial body of existing evidence and research on the economic impacts of public R&D investment at national and regional levels.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
26
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
In its response to this report, the Government should set out how it intends to ensure the Catapult network is more effectively targeted at addressing regional disparities, including its assessment of whether removing the imperative for Catapults to raise private funds would increase their impact in the UK’s regions. (Recommendation, …
Read more
In its response to this report, the Government should set out how it intends to ensure the Catapult network is more effectively targeted at addressing regional disparities, including its assessment of whether removing the imperative for Catapults to raise private funds would increase their impact in the UK’s regions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 83)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly rejects the recommendation to remove the requirement for Catapults to raise private funding, arguing that the current mixed funding model ensures market responsiveness, prevents displacement of private activity, and provides flexibility to address regional contexts.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
34
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
The Government should publish a Regional Graduate Retention Strategy, backed by investment and cross-department coordination. This should include support for university-industry collaboration to create high- skilled local employment, linked to analysis of public services such as housing, transport, and education – which are needed to create the conditions for graduates …
Read more
The Government should publish a Regional Graduate Retention Strategy, backed by investment and cross-department coordination. This should include support for university-industry collaboration to create high- skilled local employment, linked to analysis of public services such as housing, transport, and education – which are needed to create the conditions for graduates to build careers throughout the UK. (Recommendation, Paragraph 104) Diffusion and absorption
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government partially agrees but explicitly states it will not commit to a new Regional Graduate Retention Strategy at this time, asserting that existing policies such as Local Growth Plans, Investment Zones, and Local Skills Improvement Plans already address university-industry collaboration and local employment.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
39
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
The Regulatory Innovation Office should work with universities, SMEs, and spinouts to map the full pathway from research to market, identifying where disproportionate burdens or barriers exist. It should also publish a regional support strategy with measurable objectives and deliverables. (Recommendation, Paragraph 119) Devolution
Read more
The Regulatory Innovation Office should work with universities, SMEs, and spinouts to map the full pathway from research to market, identifying where disproportionate burdens or barriers exist. It should also publish a regional support strategy with measurable objectives and deliverables. (Recommendation, Paragraph 119) Devolution
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government partially agrees, but emphasizes the Regulatory Innovation Office's focused role on regulatory barriers, stating that mapping the full research-to-market pathway and publishing a regional support strategy would cover issues beyond RIO's remit, which are addressed by wider government initiatives.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
43
Recommendation
3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, …
Rejected
The Government should commission an independent review examining the link between R&D, new businesses and growth in jobs and GDP since 2008, and task it with recommending how to make public investment in R&D increase productivity, growth, and jobs. This should use examples such as Greater Manchester as case studies …
Read more
The Government should commission an independent review examining the link between R&D, new businesses and growth in jobs and GDP since 2008, and task it with recommending how to make public investment in R&D increase productivity, growth, and jobs. This should use examples such as Greater Manchester as case studies in raising productivity, to identify lessons for other regions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 132) 50
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation for an independent review examining the link between R&D, new businesses, and economic growth. It states that a substantial body of existing evidence already addresses these links at national and regional levels.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology