London

The British government's foreign-aid department looks set to appoint a chief scientist, after being criticized for how it uses science.

Senior academics found fault with the Department for International Development's research programmes at an inquiry begun in January by the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee. The department currently spends £80million (US$150 million) a year on research in areas such as agriculture and health, with the aim of reducing poverty in poorer nations. Most of the money is distributed as grants to research institutions in Britain and, increasingly, developing countries.

At one of the committee's hearings on 15 March, for example, John Lawton, chief executive of the Natural Environment Research Council, a government funding body, was asked to sum up the department's use of scientific advice in a few words. He chose “complacent”, “rather arrogant” and “ill-informed”.

Paul Spray, the department's head of research, rejects Lawton's characterization, pointing out that he and other officials meet regularly with people in the research councils to discuss funding programmes. He acknowledges that his staff could interact more with individual scientists, but says a recruitment drive to increase research staff numbers from 7 to 17 should help to rectify this.

The department has asked a three-man task force to examine how it gets advice on science and technology. Sources close to the department and the team, which started work in April and is due to finish in June, say it is likely to recommend the creation of a post of chief scientist. The department will also ramp up its research funding to at least £100 million a year in 2006–07. Its draft research strategy, released on 11 May, identified four priority areas — agricultural productivity in Africa, killer diseases, countries that work in the interests of the poor, and climate change.

The strategy was welcomed by UK overseas development experts, but critics said it included little direct input from scientists — a complaint Spray accepts. He says that in some areas, such as agricultural science, he has been able to identify science organizations that share the department's aim of reducing poverty, but that collaboration in other areas is hampered by a lack of suitable partners.