British scientists are raising alarms over the potential “catastrophic” effects of impending budget cuts on physics research. With public funding agencies facing an average 30% reduction, groups are preparing for possible cuts of up to 60%.

Many research teams may lose their funding entirely, leading to a decline in research jobs and a potential withdrawal from significant international projects, including CERN, the prestigious particle physics laboratory located near Geneva, Switzerland.

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), the public body responsible for funding science and business, has delineated a £38.6 billion budget over the next four years. Although UKRI claims this figure does not account for inflation, it suggests a marginal increase. However, physics researchers predict substantial cuts are imminent.

UKRI’s budgetary plans aim to bolster scientific research while benefiting the national economy. As CEO Ian Chapman asserted in a February 5 press briefing, the organization must prioritize commercialization and make hard choices for the greatest national impact.

UKRI allocates grants through nine councils, including the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) which specializes in particle physics, nuclear physics, and astronomy, covering financial commitments to CERN and the European Space Agency. STFC is anticipated to bear the majority of the cuts, with reports indicating a staggering £162 million reduction.

Grant recipients of STFC have been advised to brace for an overall funding reduction of 30%. Additionally, they have been asked to devise budget alternatives anticipating 20%, 40%, and 60% cuts. The Institute of Physics (IOP) deemed this news “a devastating blow” to British physics foundations.

IOP President-elect Paul Howarth warned that these cuts would undermine “our understanding of space and humanity’s progress.” He emphasized that cutting UK funding would diminish the nation’s experimental capacity, stifling innovation and economic growth. “We implore the Government to reconsider its funding strategies,” he stated.

Michelle Doherty, STFC’s executive chairman, acknowledged the organization’s overly ambitious goals. “We are stretching our resources too thinly and are facing tough years ahead,” she remarked. “Our current budget restricts us from achieving all our objectives.”

During her briefing, Doherty highlighted the end of international collaboration in particle physics due to financial constraints, a reality that partners abroad are also grappling with.

John Ellis, a professor at King’s College London, cautioned that job reductions would damage the UK’s standing among international research collaborators. “Such actions tarnish the UK’s reputation as a dependable partner,” he noted.

Projects like the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), instrumental in discovering the Higgs boson, are at risk. Funding was allocated for upgrades during the experimental shutdown. “We face uncertainty about future solutions,” Ellis lamented.

Another LHC initiative, LHCb, which examines the matter-antimatter disparity, may also see its budget eliminated, jeopardizing essential upgrades. Reports suggest the UKRI’s funding for the U.S.-led electron-ion collider in New York is also at risk. UKRI has not clarified the status of these projects when approached for comment by New Scientist.

Ellis warned that significant cuts to physics research could hamper the UK’s future by eliminating opportunities for postdocs and junior researchers. “This isn’t a minor setback; it risks stifling a generation of young scientists,” he argued.

Jim Al Khalili, a professor at the University of Surrey, echoed these concerns, pointing out the potential decline in skill and knowledge necessary for the country’s nuclear industry and wider research initiatives. “These proposed budget reductions would devastate our communities,” he asserted.

Alicia Grated of the Science and Engineering Campaign, representing UK research institutions, noted that miscommunication regarding the cuts has resulted in confusion and uncertainty. “Clarity is crucial, regardless of the reasons behind the decision to rescind STFC funding,” she emphasized. “Any decrease in support for STFC’s resources could threaten a fundamental segment of our research ecosystem.”