€3.8 Billion Investment in Science & Technology

ballooba

The government has just announced a huge investment in Science and Technology over the next 7 years. I wonder how much of that money is going to be pumped into state run Insitutes of Technology.

Colleges like DCU and NUIM have been really good at fostering links with industry and encouraging research and development and innovation. They probably don't actually need this money that badly, as they already have plenty of confident investors.

When I started in DIT I did so because I was led to believe that the college would give me a more practical education and be more relevant to my career. While at DIT I was not aware of a single industry link in my department and there was no mention of postgraduate research. Anyone who wanted to do research went to TCD or DCU.

There was the impression that DIT didn't need to work for it's money, that the government would look after it. I am aware of one attempt by a major multinational in Ireland (the biggest?) to forge links with DIT. The person involved on the DIT side didn't even show up to the meetings and the money went to DCU AFAIK.

This to me is just another example of wasted public money and the poor value represented to the taxpayer by government investments. I'm not aware of the situation in other ITs but I don't think that DIT deserves any of this money. They will however probably get a large chunk of it.

ISAW

ballooba wrote:

The government has just announced a huge investment in Science and Technology over the next 7 years. I wonder how much of that money is going to be pumped into state run Insitutes of Technology.

...
This to me is just another example of wasted public money and the poor value represented to the taxpayer by government investments. I'm not aware of the situation in other ITs but I don't think that DIT deserves any of this money. They will however probably get a large chunk of it.

Where else do you suggest the money should go?
most of the research done is done by third level researchers. the last 3 billion witnessed a research/teaching distinction and colleges have changed along these lines.

The largest representative group for Irish researchwers voted themselves out of existance last week after ten years of lobbying. they had achieved most if not all of their aims.

ballooba

The money should go to institutions with a proven track record of achieving value for money in this area i.e. DCU, NUIM, TCD, UCD. Coincidentally or not, all of which are places which aren't run by Civil Servants.

ballooba

ISAW wrote:

the last 3 billion witnessed a research/teaching distinction and colleges have changed along these lines.

Sorry, this sentence doesn't make sense to me.

ISAW wrote:

The largest representative group for Irish researchwers voted themselves out of existance last week after ten years of lobbying. they had achieved most if not all of their aims.

Wasn't aware of this. What where they called? Surely DIT wasn't involved?

Chakar

They already have it all planned, I would say part of the funding would be supporting companies doing important R&D development in the form of grants and other forms of support like sourcing the researchers.

ballooba

Well the company I work for recently got government funding for infrastructural enhancements. In other words we took on more office space and they paid to do it up AFAIK. This was under the NDP.

The company probably could have afforded that themselves but it nice for the government to show their appreciation. The company was started by Irish guys but recently bought out by an american company. It employs circa 150 people an is involved solely in export. No indigenous market whatsoever.

Chakar

ballooba wrote:

Well the company I work for recently got government funding for infrastructural enhancements. In other words we took on more office space and they paid to do it up AFAIK. This was under the NDP.

The company probably could have afforded that themselves but it nice for the government to show their appreciation. The company was started by Irish guys but recently bought out by an american company. It employs circa 150 people an is involved solely in export. No indigenous market whatsoever.

That's good, the government aka the agencies in terms of investment potential look at the jobs that a R&D project will produce.Anyway we need more R&D projects in Ireland and fast.

Jackie laughlin

This is expensive foolishness. I know of just one Irish company doing development. Essentially R and D is not done in Ireland outside of the universities. Industry in Ireland needs low level technical/science graduates, certainly not Ph.Ds.

ballooba

I would have to disagree with you there. There is a huge amount of software companies in Ireland undertaking R&D. I could mention loads but one small company which has done alright is Rococo Software who have their own Bluetooth software embedded on Sony Ericsson phones.

Link:
http://www.rococosoft.com/press.html

civdef

This is expensive foolishness. I know of just one Irish company doing development. Essentially R and D is not done in Ireland outside of the universities. Industry in Ireland needs low level technical/science graduates, certainly not Ph.Ds.

Isn't that the whole point of this - to change that situation? It's not about what Irish industry needs right now, it's about keeping us competitive in 10-20 years time.

bonkey

ballooba wrote:

I wonder how much of that money is going to be pumped into state run Insitutes of Technology.
...
This to me is just another example of wasted public money and the poor value represented to the taxpayer by government investments. I'm not aware of the situation in other ITs but I don't think that DIT deserves any of this money. They will however probably get a large chunk of it.

So basically what you're saying is that you don't know where the money will go, but have concluded from this lack of knowledge that its a bad investment.

Your reasoning impresses me.

GuanYin

Jackie laughlin wrote:

This is expensive foolishness. I know of just one Irish company doing development. Essentially R and D is not done in Ireland outside of the universities. Industry in Ireland needs low level technical/science graduates, certainly not Ph.Ds.

I was awaiting this thread with glee.

I partly agree with this post and it is also my opinion that this is a rather ill thought out move.

While there is certainly a lack of R&D industry here in health, there is an R&D industry in other sciences. On the whole, our science industry is geared towards production and not research.

So why produce more postgraduates? There is an important difference between a qualified workforce and an overqualified workforce. We are verging towards the latter in the science industry, mainly because so many people already seek PhDs and find that there are no jobs for them here.

So we have the "brain drain" to other states which means that Ireland itself will lose alot of the value of the money that they invest in 4th level education and research.

The money should go to lab and research infrastructure which will allow existing research labs and groups to set up centres of excellence and employ qualified PhD researchers AND degree/diploma holding technicians.

If, on the other hand you want to screw up a sector, by all means throw money at it and make it top heavy with over qualified people and no suitable jobs for them.

Jackie laughlin

This is encouraging. I thought I'd be alone in wanting to slaughter this sacred cow. There is an unholy alliance of foolishness and vested interest at work here.

The universities are in trouble and are desperate for a share of the money in this latest "4th level" wheeze. Professional institutions are delighted that their members are being valued at last. Liberal pro-business politicians think that this surely has to be the future.

I'm sure that some companies in Ireland are active in development. I'd be shocked to discover a single one active in research. The last thing a development laboratory needs is a Ph.D. What it does need is lesser qualified, creative people who are happy to work on ideas which are not "cutting edge". As a society with technological ambitions we need a small trickle of engineering/science Ph.Ds. and a modest supply of graduates in these areas. The work isn't there, the work can't be there, for any greater numbers. Globalisation has centralised R and D and outsourced other work.

If we are prepared to look realistically at Ireland in the world and to understand the trends in industry, we will see the need to plough investment into primary and secondary education and - this will go down like a lead balloon in the current climate of techno foolishness - at 3rd level into the humanities. Why? Because the future belongs to educated, flexible minds who can manipulate information - any information! Specialisation was a 20th century phenomenon.

By the way, I'm a techno myself and all my colleagues and acquaintances work as managers. I haven't met a REAL R and D person in Ireland in years. The ones I did know have moved to the US.

Will engineers, technicians and scientists working in the real world, please speak up before this money is wasted.

GuanYin

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I'm sure that some companies in Ireland are active in development. I'd be shocked to discover a single one active in research.

Well then you may be shocked to know that Wyeth and Johnson and Johnson are two companies that have/will have research underway in Ireland in the pharma sector and eventually major research sites.

Quite a few engineering/compu-engineering ones too afaik.

ballooba

bonkey wrote:

So basically what you're saying is that you don't know where the money will go, but have concluded from this lack of knowledge that its a bad investment.

Your reasoning impresses me.

No, I'm saying if it goes to DIT, then it will be a bad investment.

bonkey

ballooba wrote:

No, I'm saying if it goes to DIT, then it will be a bad investment.

Well I kinda guessed thats what you probably meant to say. I was more pointing out that its not what you actually said.

Its something I'm seeing throughout this thread. Maybe you guys have all got access to information that I don't, but so far no-one has offered any information (or links to information) about how this money will be spent. Instead, a lot of people are saying how its all a waste of money etc.

I'm just wondering how many are stating a definite when what they mean is a conditional - stating it will be bad when they mean it might be.

jc

GuanYin

bonkey wrote:

Well I kinda guessed thats what you probably meant to say. I was more pointing out that its not what you actually said.

Its something I'm seeing throughout this thread. Maybe you guys have all got access to information that I don't, but so far no-one has offered any information (or links to information) about how this money will be spent. Instead, a lot of people are saying how its all a waste of money etc.

I'm just wondering how many are stating a definite when what they mean is a conditional - stating it will be bad when they mean it might be.

jc

The full story is being condensed and if you take maybe the body of 2-3 reports you'll get the full gist.

Its basically a re-hash of the old development plans with new money.

Basically they want to:

- Revamp the 2nd level science system (good thing)
- Protect potential intellectual property developed by universities (Opinions on this are mixed on whether it is good bad or indifferent for academic research - or even what it means).
- Increase industry R&D investment (empty promise, we already have more than enough PhDs to sustain low level growth in this sector yet the companies aren't coming - basically because Ireland is too expensive. Even if they give tax incentives, we'll never compete with Oz or Singapore because its just far too cheap to set up there and scientists will always travel).
- Engage a more even distribution of research among disciplines (I'm not even sure what this means - my guess is it intends to increase medical research at industry level - same problems as above).
- Create an environment allowing more access to the EU Framework Programme Funding (This is pretty vague, it could mean fund lab infrastructure, which would be a very very good thing, but hopes are dashed when you then see.......)
- Doubling Postgraduate research positions, estimated increase to 1,000 PhDs every year by 2013 and a further 315 postgrads in the humanities and social sciences (this is just ridiculous, there simply aren't that many jobs, and even if there were through an influx of industry jobs, how long before you saturate the industry? There are thousands of PhD graduates here on short term undervalued contract jobs with little to no chance of progression to managment or academic positions. The first step is to bring in positions for them and grants for them. At present there probably aren't enough labs to take on that many PhDs. Basically we will still be funding the education of PhDs for other countries - probably Austraila, USA and Singapore).
- Attract world-class researchers to Ireland (what about the ones stuck in postdoctoral limbo here?)


The STI can probably supply you with a copy ofthe plan (try the forfas website) and going through it, you will see it vague, contradicting and confusing as to how its proposals will actually better the current research environment.

Generally, if you want to build a tall building, you setup foundations and build upwards, the structure of their document looks at building the top floors first and then seeing if they can stack them all together.

ronbyrne2005

basically this is too little too late.japan scandinavia and many of the most advanced economies invest 3-4% of gdp in r&d we wont get to 2.4% untill 2012!.there may be some r&d going on in ireland but most of it is for foreign multinationals which will leave here eventually/soon? and then where will wealth come from? we need strong indigenous companies exporting services/knowledge in order to maintain the current level of economic activity/propersity.i honestly beleive this economy is fecked in decades to come.

Jackie laughlin

psi wrote:

Well then you may be shocked to know that Wyeth and Johnson and Johnson are two companies that have/will have research underway in Ireland in the pharma sector and eventually major research sites.

Quite a few engineering/compu-engineering ones too afaik.

Perhaps I overstated my position by saying "shocked". It is posible that Wyeth are considering research. I'll check. There is no chance that J&J will do research here or anywhere else. They may do dev. I'll check this too.

I don't mean to be rude but your disagreement with me seems to be a quibble rather than a demolition. I'm substantially correct in my analysis. This proposal is a waste of money initiated by people who are totally out of touch with Irish society, industry, technology, trends and the globalised economy. Do these people ever talk or read outside their immediate circle?

Time Magazine

Nobody knows for sure the use of R&D. Some economists believe that the only way to increase living standards in the long run is improved technology, while some of the best economists in the world are casting serious doubts on its merit.

This research printed in The Economist (a subscription is needed to view the article, but the graph is visible to all) would suggest R&D is, at best, hyped; and, at worst, a lame duck.

I dunno.

ISAW

ballooba wrote:

The money should go to institutions with a proven track record of achieving value for money in this area i.e. DCU, NUIM, TCD, UCD. Coincidentally or not, all of which are places which aren't run by Civil Servants.

How do you measuer a "track record"? How is it proven as you claim?

Actually these places ARE run by public servants. they are almost to a man paid from the public purse and have ever increasing administration costs.

ISAW

ballooba wrote:

Sorry, this sentence doesn't make sense to me.

Most research had been done by third level lecturers who also did research. With SFI CSETS PRTLI etc. money has gone into post doctoral research which has not teaching element.

Wasn't aware of this. What where they called? Surely DIT wasn't involved?

THe Irish Research Scientists Association. They had members from all third level institutions as well as industry.

ISAW

Jackie laughlin wrote:

This is expensive foolishness. I know of just one Irish company doing development. Essentially R and D is not done in Ireland outside of the universities.

While most RDTI is done within university campuses many of the centres have no direct connection with the educational institution. Principal investigators are not allowed to teach. Also there are many examples of sound RDTI done outside universities. Locktite in Limerick for example.

Industry in Ireland needs low level technical/science graduates, certainly not Ph.Ds.

Current economic theory would be totally at odds with this. BERD needs to be increased. Indeed Business in thriving economies expends more than the state on RDTI.

ISAW

psi wrote:

I was awaiting this thread with glee.

I partly agree with this post and it is also my opinion that this is a rather ill thought out move.

While there is certainly a lack of R&D industry here in health, there is an R&D industry in other sciences. On the whole, our science industry is geared towards production and not research.

This isnt true! Ireland is a world leader in medical devices. One can not have a science base without research bt one can not fund research without patented products.

So why produce more postgraduates? There is an important difference between a qualified workforce and an overqualified workforce. We are verging towards the latter in the science industry, mainly because so many people already seek PhDs and find that there are no jobs for them here.

Care to convince me of this high unemployment rate of PhD's?

So we have the "brain drain" to other states which means that Ireland itself will lose alot of the value of the money that they invest in 4th level education and research.

Please show me where all these Irish PhD's are going?

If, on the other hand you want to screw up a sector, by all means throw money at it and make it top heavy with over qualified people and no suitable jobs for them.

I think you have it the wrong way round. the State doesnt create jobs and then look for people to fill them. The idea is that a knowledge base creates the market which provides the employment.

ISAW

Jackie laughlin wrote:

The universities are in trouble and are desperate for a share of the money in this latest "4th level" wheeze. Professional institutions are delighted that their members are being valued at last. Liberal pro-business politicians think that this surely has to be the future.

You should read the plan. the lions share (as last time) is business expendature on R and D.

I'm sure that some companies in Ireland are active in development. I'd be shocked to discover a single one active in research.

Prepare yourself for a shock. ireland is the biggest supplier in life sciences and in biotechnology to the US market.

The last thing a development laboratory needs is a Ph.D. What it does need is lesser qualified, creative people who are happy to work on ideas which are not "cutting edge".

wrong! it needs both. Good technicians are essential. they also may be PhD's because of the level of knowledge required. Post doctoral researchers are also needed and are in short supply.

As a society with technological ambitions we need a small trickle of engineering/science Ph.Ds. and a modest supply of graduates in these areas.

read the plan! Chapter two. 2006 to 2013
Principla investigators from 40 to 550
Post docs 120 to 1050
research assistants and technicians both from 20 to 175
PhD students from 235 to 1775

Postgrads from 543 up to 997
post docs from 187 to 315

The work isn't there, the work can't be there, for any greater numbers. Globalisation has centralised R and D and outsourced other work.

Wrong again! The knowledge creates the wealth! R and D isnt centralised. there may be hubs and nodes or porter clusters. the money usually comes to the triadic patent base.

If we are prepared to look realistically at Ireland in the world and to understand the trends in industry, we will see the need to plough investment into primary and secondary education and - this will go down like a lead balloon in the current climate of techno foolishness - at 3rd level into the humanities.

This is in the plan!

By the way, I'm a techno myself and all my colleagues and acquaintances work as managers. I haven't met a REAL R and D person in Ireland in years. The ones I did know have moved to the US.

Bet you havent met a major drugs gang criminal or an IRA leader either. does that mean they dont exist?

Will engineers, technicians and scientists working in the real world, please speak up before this money is wasted.

REad the plan! Most of the money is for non academic research.

mhenness

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Perhaps I overstated my position by saying "shocked". It is posible that Wyeth are considering research. I'll check. There is no chance that J&J will do research here or anywhere else. They may do dev. I'll check this too.

I don't mean to be rude but your disagreement with me seems to be a quibble rather than a demolition. I'm substantially correct in my analysis. This proposal is a waste of money initiated by people who are totally out of touch with Irish society, industry, technology, trends and the globalised economy. Do these people ever talk or read outside their immediate circle?

I guess only time will tell if the money gets spent wisely in this area or not. Industry armed with the right people could use this funding very effectively to generate new products and services. Universities are there to educate and do basic science. Industry needs people coming from universities (scientists and engineers) and also the basic science on which they can build new applications and services. There is a supply chain and it should be in both directions so universities and kept up to date on how basic research is affecting the outside world. The trick is to get this supply chain up and running and working well. If we don't get this aspect of this right then I agree that there could be a lot of wastage here and funding of research at this level wont be sustainable into the long term future.

I am a PhD student myself. I studied computer science for 4 years and spent 7 years in industry before returning to do my PhD. You might say I have experience on both sides of the fence. On one side I'm an engineer while on the other I'm training to be a scientist. From my experience of doing the science thing I'm not clear yet what advantages the subject matter of my work will bring to society and/or industry. This is an issue I wrestled with for a ages in order to give what I'm doing some more practical meaning. Right now I've settled on just viewing the PhD as an education in complicated problem solving. Maybe some day I can bring these skills back to industry where I can solve practical problems that may otherwise go unsolved.

sceptre

Jackie laughlin wrote:

It is posible that Wyeth are considering research. I'll check.

They've been doing at least one biopharmaceutical research project at DCU since June of last year. The one person I know working in research on the project isn't a student (and hasn't been in years), nor does she have any teaching interaction with DCU students. It's basically a private project publically-funded that happens to be sited in an Irish university.

GuanYin

ISAW wrote:

This isnt true! Ireland is a world leader in medical devices. One can not have a science base without research bt one can not fund research without patented products.

And this is just a small sector of the overall research area in Ireland. Intellectual property is important and the last few rounds of SFI seem to reflect that, however, there is a large core of fundamental science in Ireland which is overlooked.

As someone who works in the field and has done for many years, if you can show me where all these industry research positions are, then please, point the way.

Now if I wanted a production position, I could send off about 10 resumes right now.

Care to convince me of this high unemployment rate of PhD's?

I never said there were unemployed PhDs I said there weren't enough research jobs for them.

Invariably they take positions in other areas, mostly production and management production - Wyeth, Abbott and the like are large employers there. Some go into Regulatory Affairs and we have a few companies that deal with that.

At present Wyeth and a few other companies employ researchers through university projects. Wyeth and J&J (throughan affiliate company) do plan research centres but it won't be enough.

In research in Ireland, postdoctoral research positions are the main employment route. Now go look at UCD, UCC or NUIG, they all show figures that give a 1:4, 1:5 ratio of postdoctoral researchers to postgraduate researchers in their institutes. The influx of new psotgraduates is always higher and rising while postdoctoral positions barely fluctuate.

So where do all the excess PhD graduates go? They go to non-research industry jobs and they go to research labs abroad.

Unless you can show me otherwise?

This argument argues that the european brain drain is overestimated and that may be true, but as the article notes, europe (and this is true in Ireland) doesn't even properly track the PhD's it produces. There are no adequate stats.

Please show me where all these Irish PhD's are going?

As I and the reports above state, we don't track them so we can't.

However, as anyone in science will tell you, and I know there are several researchers on boards, many go to the US, UK and Australia to postdoc. The "brain drain" is a well known issue in Irish research. Surely you must know this.

I think you have it the wrong way round. the State doesnt create jobs and then look for people to fill them. The idea is that a knowledge base creates the market which provides the employment.

A knowledge base only works if you have employment to sustain the graduates produced. Ireland simply does not have enough PhD graduate research positions at present and increasing PhDs without tackling this will not help the matters.

GuanYin

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Perhaps I overstated my position by saying "shocked". It is posible that Wyeth are considering research. I'll check. There is no chance that J&J will do research here or anywhere else. They may do dev. I'll check this too.

Check away, I hope you're not a scientist using such definitive statements without having the facts.

J&J will be opening a munster based research centr eto aument their current development. Most likely through Jansen.

Wyeth currently directly employ researchers in UCD and DCU and are opening a research campus in the coming year (or two). Surely you know about this?

I don't mean to be rude but your disagreement with me seems to be a quibble rather than a demolition.

I'm not trying to demolish your argument, I'd just prefer to stick to the facts.

I'm substantially correct in my analysis. This proposal is a waste of money initiated by people who are totally out of touch with Irish society, industry, technology, trends and the globalised economy. Do these people ever talk or read outside their immediate circle?

The money could work well if it was used in the right way. The models we need to emmulate are out there. Several eastern countries have become strong R&D players literally overnight.

You can't take on PhDs without enough PIs to supervise them. You can'tget PIs without training and employing postdocs. When you initiate a plan that calls for an influx of PhDs but offers no evidence of creating an employment sector for their training, advancement or employment upon graduation, then you ask for trouble.

ISAW

mhenness wrote:

I guess only time will tell if the money gets spent wisely in this area or not.

I don't accept this! If public money is being used then the process should be transparent. If private money is used it should be moderated by public interest.

Industry armed with the right people could use this funding very effectively to generate new products and services. Universities are there to educate and do basic science.

But not ONLY for that reason. ther are other reasons. REsearch institutes are one. sports and cultural life are another. They are not only for education.

Industry needs people coming from universities (scientists and engineers) and also the basic science on which they can build new applications and services.

Industry also needs links with cutting edge research and cultural content supplied by the Arts (whether in academe or outside).

There is a supply chain and it should be in both directions so universities and [are?] kept up to date on how basic research is affecting the outside world.

It is unlikely that fundamental scientific researchers would be unaware of existing applications of their work.

The trick is to get this supply chain up and running and working well. If we don't get this aspect of this right then I agree that there could be a lot of wastage here and funding of research at this level wont be sustainable into the long term future.

Only if you view research as supplying products to a market. REsearch can also be viewed as being about finding new knowledge.

I am a PhD student myself. I studied computer science for 4 years and spent 7 years in industry before returning to do my PhD. You might say I have experience on both sides of the fence. On one side I'm an engineer while on the other I'm training to be a scientist. From my experience of doing the science thing I'm not clear yet what advantages the subject matter of my work will bring to society and/or industry.

What distinguishes a PhD is its contribution of new knowledge i.e. of advancing the field by original contribution.
One can never justify finding new knowledge on the basis that ther is an application for it. On the other hand name a produce that did not requirer basic research at some time.

This is an issue I wrestled with for a ages in order to give what I'm doing some more practical meaning. Right now I've settled on just viewing the PhD as an education in complicated problem solving. Maybe some day I can bring these skills back to industry where I can solve practical problems that may otherwise go unsolved.

I would have no doubt that the original contribution you will make will find application elsewhere. i would not worry about trying to find a "significance" for your work.

ISAW

psi wrote:

And this is just a small sector of the overall research area in Ireland.

How do you define "small"? how do you define "overall research area"?
The point you made was that Ireland was not doing RDTI in Health. Ireland is!
One can not discount "killer applications" either. Windows and Viagra (though not patented in Ireland) are only two products with HUGE export figures.

Intellectual property is important and the last few rounds of SFI seem to reflect that, however, there is a large core of fundamental science in Ireland which is overlooked.

Such as?

As someone who works in the field and has done for many years, if you can show me where all these industry research positions are, then please, point the way.

Wyatt, the old Digital employees, Intel, Locktite, Silicon devices, Plasma Ireland,
http://www.idaireland.com/home/index.aspx?id=682

http://www.sciencecouncil.ie/publications/forfas050525/index.html

Investment in Research and Development (R&D) performed by the business sector in Ireland increased to €1,076m in 2003 and up from €901m in 2001
http://www.forfas.ie/publications/show/pub204.html

This study looks at the regional distribution of skills and employment in six key sectors in Ireland. It traces the historical development of this employment profile and considers the future role of skills in contributing to regionally balanced economic growth and development.
http://www.forfas.ie/publications/show/pub230.html

Now if I wanted a production position, I could send off about 10 resumes right now.

The soft job with tenure as a lecturer is harder to get nowadays. More likely is a contract of indefinite duration in a research group.

I never said there were unemployed PhDs I said there weren't enough research jobs for them.

There are plenty of jobs for them. They just wont get paid what they want. which is why the State and industry have to find money to pay them.

At present Wyeth and a few other companies employ researchers through university projects. Wyeth and J&J (throughan affiliate company) do plan research centres but it won't be enough.

The theory is that the knowledge base creates the wealth which creates the jobs. They dont offer jobs and then try to find work for someone to do when the job is filled.

In research in Ireland, postdoctoral research positions are the main employment route. Now go look at UCD, UCC or NUIG, they all show figures that give a 1:4, 1:5 ratio of postdoctoral researchers to postgraduate researchers in their institutes. The influx of new psotgraduates is always higher and rising while postdoctoral positions barely fluctuate.

Maybe because postdocs are tied to teaching and tenured pensionable public money? Maybe because they dont want to widen the base of their peers and dilute their own political power and earnings as maybe also in the case of medical consultants?

So where do all the excess PhD graduates go? They go to non-research industry jobs and they go to research labs abroad.

And to fourth level research institutes within and outside third level campuses. and to emergent SME's which are knowledge centered. The idea of "we have a thousand PhD's now why do we need ten thousand?" smacks to me of the old leftie idea of the planned economy. Not predicting the trend. No growth. Creating jobs for people rather than getting quality people to create jobs etc.

Unless you can show me otherwise?

This argument argues that the european brain drain is overestimated and that may be true, but as the article notes, europe (and this is true in Ireland) doesn't even properly track the PhD's it produces. There are no adequate stats.

In 1980 Us industrial output was thirty times Irelands. It is about seven times now. Over that period Italy went from ten times Ireland to twice,; Spain from x2 to parity; UK from x14 to <x3; Japan x20 to x5.

High technology manufacturing in Ireland has had similar growth over the same period. The stats are there. Ireland compares well to other knowledge based economies.

As I and the reports above state, we don't track them so we can't.

But we can track the growth based on value added business which is based on PhD's!

However, as anyone in science will tell you, and I know there are several researchers on boards, many go to the US, UK and Australia to postdoc. The "brain drain" is a well known issue in Irish research. Surely you must know this.

Development of research is based on human capital and mobility. Researchers may well go abroad but they also return with more experience. The largest cohort of immigrants are not foreigners but Irish people. Surely you must know this?

A knowledge base only works if you have employment to sustain the graduates produced.

the knowledge base creates the employment when it reaches a "critical mass". There are various socio economic demographic and geographic models for this. One example is the ex DIGITAL workers in Galway. Abouyt 2500 jobs were lost when Digital closed. There were about 300-400 researchers who had experience. That base created several thousand jobs. Of course maybe not for the same 2000 workers but that is a differnt issue. Whether the knowledge base creates the jobs is the issue here.

Ireland simply does not have enough PhD graduate research positions at present and increasing PhDs without tackling this will not help the matters.

Again that is a seperated though related issue covered in the report/policy. BOTH are targetted! Indeed there are a whole plethora of additions I could suggest about postgrads but they are side issues to the PhD knowledge base.