Continued Copernicus membership divides opinion
An interim evaluation of the UK’s renewed Copernicus membership has found that participation in the EU Earth observation programme brings increased influence, access to highly valued data, and a modest amount of contract wins.
And yet think tank Science Works has since taken issue with the study, suggesting that what its findings actually demonstrate is that Copernicus is “a waste of money so large it’s visible from space.”
The original evaluation – conducted by know.space, Frontier Economics and TerraWatch Space on a commission from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – explores two years of Copernicus membership from January 2024, after the UK was absent for three years following Brexit. A full evaluation report will be published in 2028.
On the plus side
Participation is “essential” if the UK wishes to shape the future direction of Copernicus, the report concludes. While as an observer in the programme the UK does not hold formal voting rights, stakeholders interviewed for the report suggested that this has “not materially limited its influence” given the possibilities for informal engagement.
On the financial side, it is noted that rejoining halfway through the 2021–27 programme limited contract wins for UK-based organisations – 30 organisations secured contracts in 2024 and 2025, worth £26.1m, with 12 Met Office contracts accounting for £6.6m of this. The authors observe that many contracts had already been issued before the UK rejoined.
The effects of the UK’s absence from the programme also saw a diminishing of the country’s Earth observation capacity, with organisations reducing their UK operations and talent relocating to Europe. But the evaluation finds indications of a positive “Copernicus effect” whereby companies that won Copernicus contracts experienced “faster and economically-meaningful employment growth relative to comparable UK firms.”
Data access comes across as the key benefit to the UK’s participation: “it is clear that the use of Copernicus data is deeply embedded into UK public services and the operations of many companies.” Over a typical 30-day period, more than 1,500 UK users are said to access atmosphere or climate data through Copernicus portals. The evaluation report estimates that the average organisation using Copernicus data would pay between £32,000 and £61,000 per year to avoid a total loss of data access. Were the UK no longer to remain part of Copernicus beyond the current programme, possible restrictions on data include delays, download quotas, and limited access to archives.
Different observations
Think tank Science Works has taken issue with the evaluation report’s conclusions and interpretation of the data, arguing that the UK should seek to withdraw from Copernicus over value for money concerns – though it recognises that the Westminster government is likely to come under “significant pressure” to continue its association post-2027.
An opinion piece from research Will Stone, entitled The Earth Observation Black Hole, makes the case that the limited economic returns identified by the evaluation are outweighed by the approximately £133m in annual costs – and that the substantial share of the benefits which are ascribed to data access could well be “significantly overstated.”
Stone also suggests that the emphasis on non-quantifiable benefits such as the UK’s influence within the programme is misplaced, given that the country is “cut out of the most important decisions. He recommends the association costs could be better spent elsewhere:
“Other research and development (R&D) programmes are going through a period of prioritisation as steady government budgets absorb increased cost pressures, and as the government shifts its support towards economic growth. Copernicus should not be exempt from this.”