Ireland’s new research funding strategy risks damaging “truly innovative and ground-breaking” discovery research while support for arts, humanities and social science studies may also be significantly cut, researchers have warned.

In an , academics have expressed their “deep concern” about Research Ireland’s recently published 2026-30 strategy which will guide how €4.55 billion (£4 billion) is distributed over the next five years, including plans to  3,000 PhDs and 2,000 postdoctoral researchers.

“The new strategy is structurally, rhetorically and materially focused on commercially translatable research and economic impact rather than supporting bedrock, fundamental, discovery research and research for the public good,” states the letter which attracted more than 1,000 signatures in its first day after going live on 27 May.

Criticising the strategy’s “disproportionate focus on industry interests”, it argues this emphasis “marginalises the arts, humanities and social sciences” and, more broadly, “minimises research for social good and research that is truly innovative and ground-breaking”.

ߣߣ��Ƶ

Launched in early March, the Research Ireland  has emphasised a need to ensure curiosity-driven excellence is translated into outcomes that strengthen economic growth or deliver tangible societal benefit.

Those goals echo similar reforms across the Irish sea where UK Research and Innovation’s funding model has been changed to ensure more funding is directed towards research explicitly aligned with government missions, while the European Commission is also pressing for more research funding to be 

ߣߣ��Ƶ

The changes follow a merger of Science Foundation Ireland, which covered basic and applied STEM funding, and the Irish Research Council, which covered all disciplines, including arts, humanities and social sciences (AHSS) in 2024.

Prior to that merger, more than 2,500 scientists called for the new funding body to protect funding for AHSS subjects amid concerns Research Ireland would favour STEM subjects. Drawing attention to the “imbalance” in funding for AHSS subjects, the letter sent to higher education minister James Lawless says the new strategy is an “assault on Ireland’s research ecosystem” and its “strong private-sector bias is a threat to democratic processes”.

The letter highlights, in particular, the potential loss of PhD studentships and postdoctoral research positions in AHSS subjects. Previously scholarships were awarded centrally by the Irish Research Council but, under the new strategy, will instead be awarded to universities to distribute which, according to the letter, “undermines the notion of funding excellence in ideas and people regardless of discipline or institution by concentrating awards into institutional priorities”.

Arguing the new system “undermines truly independent, impartial, international, fair and comparable review across all institutions by placing the review process in institutional hands”, the letter states the “dismantling” of the current “prestigious centralised scholarships/fellowships [would remove] the external signal of excellence and reputation that attracts high-calibre researchers”.

ߣߣ��Ƶ

“Having a centralised PhD programme which was internationally peer-reviewed and excellence-led has been one of the great strengths of Ireland’s research system. Getting rid of it does not make sense on so many levels,” said Jennie Stephens, professor of climate justice at Maynooth University, who is one of the organisers of the letter.

“If universities are running their own PhD recruitment programmes then you might have a situation where individual applicants are applying to several universities,” she added, stating researchers had been previously assured that structural change would not happen when Research Ireland was formed.

More broadly, the strategy’s requirement for non-applied research to demonstrate its future economic utility will harm curiosity-driven, investigator-led research, with researchers incentivised to embrace industry research agendas, said Stephens.

“If all public research is funnelled toward the very narrow goal of increasing economic growth, it will have a hugely negative impact on what type of research is funded,” she explained, noting that industry and societal needs do not always align when it comes to research.

ߣߣ��Ƶ

“That is particularly true in my own area of climate and energy research. Industry only funds what will benefit their interests rather than focusing on what is good for people or the planet,” she said.

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com