A familiar story.

For more years than I can remember, it has been said about the UK that while it is excellent at basic research, when it comes to turning that research into real products it loses out, with UK inventions being successfully commercialised elsewhere. Whether it is penicillin, Viagra or the hovercraft, the jet engine or synthetic dyes and photography, the real money has been made elsewhere.

And once again the latest report from the UK Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, International comparative performance of the UK research base, points out how successful the UK is at basic research. The report provides an annual benchmark for the UK government and others to assess how the UK is performing alongside 25 of the world's leading research economies, including the G8 nations as well as India and China.

This year's report highlights that the UK has increased its share of published research. An analysis of 17m papers and 22.5m citations shows that the UK contributes 9% of papers published annually in the world's leading scientific journals, and its share of citations is 12%, putting it in second place behind the US. In 'high impact' journals, which comprise just 1% of all journals and includes titles like Nature and Science, the citation share increases to 13.4%.

As Ian Pearson, UK minister for science and innovation said: 'The quality of research undertaken in the UK and reported in journal papers is reflected by the fact that the UK leads the other G8 nations. UK researchers receive on average two and a half times more citations compared with the US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia.

'For a country of its size, the UK is widely acknowledged to be an extremely effective research performer. It is difficult to improve on this level of achievement, but we have done so despite ever increasing competition. With continued investment from the government and the outstanding research talents we possess I am confident that the UK can sustain its position as the world's most productive research nation.'

All good news so far. But the UK BioIndustry Association (BIA) has sounded a word of caution about interpretation of the report. While welcoming Pearson's comments, the BIA pointed out that while the UK is good at innovation and research, it remains 'way behind' many other countries in both Europe and elsewhere in terms of the uptake of innovation and the translation of research into products. The BIA called on the UK government to stick to its commitment to ensuring that the UK is the number one location for science and research, by both providing and encouraging research investment.

Barbara Blaney, director of research and clinical development at the BIA, said: 'It is important that we as the industry, as well as government as a key funder of research in the UK, recognise the need to turn RBD into genuine outcomes such as new and innovative medicines that benefit the health and wealth of our society.... We therefore welcome any initiative that the government can take that encourages investment into this high-potential industry.'

A recent study by Oxford Economics, The impact of the intermediate research and technology sector on the UK economy, highlights the key area of translating research into new products, which it says is 'a strategic component that delivers expoitation of scientific and technological advances to UK business and a key player in building the competitiveness of UK industry'. According to the study, the sector fills a crucial role between academia and industry by enabling the transfer of 'raw' knowledge derived from academic research into 'problem solutions' that can be understood and utilised by industry.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The study says that government does not distinguish this sector from the rest of industry, and the sector must therefore fund a sizeable proportion of its own costs of collaboration and participation in public sector innovation projects. Since these costs cannot be recovered from sales derived from subsequent product expoitation, this creates a significant barrier to participation in such projects, and lost opportunities for the UK.

Ian Pearson did acknowledge that the UK faces a tough future competing with the emerging nations like China and other Asian countries like Korea and Singapore, and most notably Iran, which has increased by tenfold its number of published research papers to almost 7 000 in 2007. China increased by fourfold its number of published papers over the past decade. However, despite having a growing scientific community, China remains relatively unproductive and is ranked 16th, surprisingly just ahead of the US, in terms of pare output/unit of R&D investment.

'Global benchmarks are affected by massive and rapid investment and growth in China and significant RBD in smaller countries, like Iran,' said Pearson. 'The competitive salaries and state of the art research environments offered by China will undoubtedly attract international researchers to its shores. And this will increase China's output and research impact further.'

Pearson pledges that the UK will not be left behind. 'With a commitment to invest almost 6bn [pounds sterling] in science research and innovation by 2011, I am confident the UK will continue to punch above its weight, retain its excellent research base and continue to be the destination of choice for leading international researchers.'

Neil Eisberg--Editor.