Soldiers in the Laboratory

The report investigates the pervasive influence of the military on UK science, engineering, and technology (SET), noting that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) accounts for approximately 30% of the total public R&D budget. It argues that this involvement drives a narrow, weapons-based approach to security and compromises scientific openness through secrecy and corporate lobbying. The authors advocate for a paradigm shift toward 'global security,' recommending that one-third to one-half of military R&D funds be diverted to address poverty, climate change, and conflict prevention.

• The UK military sector exerts a disproportionate influence on science, engineering, and technology (SET), with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) spending approximately £2.6 billion on R&D in 2003/04, representing 30 per cent of the total public R&D budget.
• Government R&D personnel in the UK are heavily concentrated in the military sector, with 40 per cent of all government R&D personnel employed by the MoD.
• Military influence in the UK is facilitated by a complex web of advisory committees and lobby groups, where a small number of corporations, such as BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin, have a significant voice in shaping the research agenda.
• The report identifies a trend of 'militarising' emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology and the biosciences, which limits public scrutiny and can divert expertise away from pressing civilian needs like naturally occurring diseases.
• The UK and USA maintain a 'special relationship' based on a 1958 treaty regarding atomic energy, which the report argues drives military R&D and may undermine the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
• Military and commercial pressures are found to compromise openness and accountability in SET through the overuse of national security and commercial confidentiality arguments, which stifles ethical debate.
• The report argues that technology transfer from military R&D to civilian use ('spin-out') is often complex, expensive, and disappointing relative to the massive investments involved.
• The authors contend that current military thinking marginalises broader concepts of security based on social justice and environmental sustainability, focusing instead on the superiority of military force.
• The report highlights a significant funding gap between military technology and initiatives for global security, such as renewable energy and climate change mitigation, which are described as being 'dwarfed' by weapons budgets.
• The report recommends that the UK government divert one-third to one-half of its current military R&D budget toward civil R&D focused on peace-building, environmental problems, and poverty alleviation.

APA

Parkinson, S., Webber, P., & Langley, C. (2005). Soldiers in the Laboratory. Scientists for Global Responsibility. https://www.sgr.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-04/Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf

Chicago

Parkinson, Stuart, Philip Webber, and Chris Langley. Soldiers in the Laboratory. Scientists for Global Responsibility, 2005. https://www.sgr.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-04/Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Parkinson |first1=Stuart |last2=Webber |first2=Philip |last3=Langley |first3=Chris |title=Soldiers in the Laboratory |publisher=Scientists for Global Responsibility |date=January 2005 |url=https://www.sgr.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-04/Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{parkinson2005soldiers, author = {Parkinson, Stuart and Webber, Philip and Langley, Chris}, title = {{Soldiers in the Laboratory}}, institution = {Scientists for Global Responsibility}, year = {2005}, month = jan, url = {https://www.sgr.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-04/Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }