Which indicators for the new public engagement activities? An exploratory study of European research institutions

Abstract

Public engagement (PE) activities have become a regular feature for several research institutions in Europe. However, while research and teaching functions can count on established indicators, PE functions are often performed as a sort of “goodwill exercise.” Few studies have focused on defining appropriate indicators and standards, particularly at the organizational level. An exploratory study was carried out on a sample of 40 European research institutions with a view to understanding whether the diffusion of PE activities has led to incorporating the PE perspective into “routine” activities of organizations. The results point to quite unequal performances among European research institutions. Also, while most research institutions examined have dedicated resources for PE activities, the study suggests that such activities are not yet considered essential. Performance indicators and standards might prove of great support for institutions and policy actors that wish to take seriously the challenge of public engagement and societal dialogue.

Improving industrial R&D practices with social and ethical aspects: Aligning key performance indicators with social and ethical aspects in food technology R&D

“…On top of that, the social aspects of KPIs remain largely invisible to innovators [10,53,55]. Yet these social aspects and their influence on KPI scores can be valuable to innovators, for they may prove relevant for corporate social responsibility [9,30] and for aligning business strategy to R&D processes [56].…”

Outreaching, Outsourcing, and Disembedding

“…Policymakers have increasingly expected scientists to engage with society and contribute to science communication related to the technologies they develop (Neresini and Bucchi 2011).…”

Engaging with the public in public engagement with research

“…This article therefore contributes not only to existing work concerned with the development of frameworks, models and indicators for evaluating public engagement (see, for example, Rowe et al, 2005;Neresini and Bucchi, 2011), it also contributes to broader debates about the development of research that is more socially relevant and publicly beneficial (see, for example, Burawoy, 2009;Brewer, 2013; Campaign for the Public University, n.d.). At minimum, we hope this framework might have a role in mitigating situations in which engaged research projects inadvertently reproduce existing power relationships between academics and publics (Facer and Enright, 2016).…”