We Need to Talk about Impact: Why Social Policy Academics need to Engage with the UK's Research Impact Agenda

Abstract

Of all the social sciences, social policy is one of the most obviously policy-orientated. One might, therefore, expect a research and funding agenda which prioritises and rewards policy relevance to garner an enthusiastic response among social policy scholars. Yet, the social policy response to the way in which major funders and the Research Excellence Framework (REF) are now prioritising 'impact' has been remarkably muted. Elsewhere in the social sciences,

An introduction to achieving policy impact for early career researchers

“…As a result scientists have come under greater societal and political pressure to more actively engage with decision-makers to facilitate knowledge exchange and the uptake of scientific knowledge into decision-making processes (Boswell and Smith, 2017;Lubchenco, 1998;Sivertsen, 2017;Stein, 2018). At the same time scientists are increasingly required to demonstrate the tangible and real-world impacts 1 arising from their research (Boswell and Smith, 2017;Sivertsen, 2017;Smith and Stewart, 2017;Stein, 2018). …”

“…Similarly, other more practical contributions in this field have a tendency to assume the reader already has access to, and knowledge of, relevant policy networks to "build relationships" with (Brisbois et al, 2018;Cairney et al, 2016;Gibbons et al, 2008); and/or is at a career stage where 'service' activities are explicitly stipulated in academic job descriptions (Arlettaz et al, 2010;Wittemyer et al, 2018), ECRs require support and information tailored to their career stage to enable them to successfully navigate policy processes. For example, evidence from the 2014 UK Research Excellence Framework suggest that ECRs are under-represented in the successful impact case studies, and indeed risk being disadvantaged by formal impact frameworks due the limited job security, networks, and institutional support of ECRs relative to established academics (Laundon, 2017;Marcella et al, 2017;Smith and Stewart, 2017). Further, the models of "impact" visible to ECRs within academia are often exceptional individuals who are advanced in their careers, who may implicitly (or even explicitly) suggest to ECRs that one can only have a positive influence on policy and practice, and maintain a research career, by following the same model.…”

“…Indeed, some scholars may feel pressured to 'game' institutionalised impact frameworks (Murphy, 2017;Sivertsen, 2017;Smith and Stewart, 2017), or that current definitions and metrics of "impact" may not necessarily reflect the full scope of benefits derived from research (Stein, 2018). An in-depth exploration of these issues is outside of the scope of this article, but can be found elsewhere (Boswell and Smith, 2017;Marcella et al, 2017;Sivertsen, 2017;Smith and Stewart, 2017;Stein, 2018) Our intention for this manuscript is to offer practical guidance specifically for ECRs who are interested in engaging with policy and practice to achieve "impact". Existing literature has provided advice for ECRs on communication (Christian, 2018;Kuehne et al, 2014), stakeholder engagement (Duchelle et al, 2009), and diverse opportunities to engage with policy both inside and outside of academia (Bednarek et al, 2018;Petes and Meyer, 2018;Pietri et al, 2013).…”

Rethinking policy ‘impact’: four models of research-policy relations

“…While there is an extensive literature on research-policy relations across fields of social science (notably in sociology, science and technology studies, social policy, political science and public management), only a very narrow range of these contributions have been marshalled to develop guidance and practice on 'impact'. Indeed, prevalent guidelines and models are frequently based on surprisingly simple and linear ideas about how research can be 'utilised' to produce more effective policies (Smith and Stewart, 2016).…”

“…Second, accounts of the work that will be undertaken to achieve research impact ('pathways to impact') now form a significant section of grant application processes for the UK funding councils (Research Councils UK, Undated). The upshot is that obtaining core research funding and project-specific grants from publicly funded sources in the UK are now strongly dependent on researchers' abilities to respond adequately to questions about the non-academic value of their work (Smith and Stewart, 2016).…”