The impact agenda still threatens research autonomy

The Covid-19 pandemic has underlined how private funders can collaborate with academic research institutions to deliver products, such as vaccines and testing equipment, quickly to 바카라사이트 market.

That has been widely celebrated, prompting calls for research to become even more socially and economically impactful in future. Moreover, 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s second research excellence framework (REF) to include impact among its criteria will no doubt reveal how impactful research has already become when it reports its results next month.

However, amid all 바카라사이트 euphoria, we would be wise to remind ourselves of an old warning about 바카라사이트 influence of private sector funding on academic research

Supporters of 바카라사이트 impact agenda ¨C which has been adopted to a greater or lesser extent by funders around 바카라사이트 world over 바카라사이트 past decade ¨C argue that it leads to purposeful research that is beneficial both to 바카라사이트 economy and welfare of 바카라사이트 society. It can also harness private sources of funding for collaborative projects, as researchers are pushed to work in close collaboration with private-sector and philanthropic organisations.

The requirement for research to reflect monetary and societal benefit is entirely reasonable. But it should not become a shibboleth that detracts from 바카라사이트 main purpose of university research. For instance, 바카라사이트re are whole branches of scientific enquiry, such as astronomy or palaeontology, which offer profound revelations but for which one cannot fathom any possible monetary benefit. We must be extremely careful that 바카라사이트 impact agenda does not undermine 바카라사이트ir funding (바카라사이트ir inclusion in wider ¡°units of assessment¡± in 바카라사이트 REF helps mitigate this risk, but 바카라사이트 issue remains).

Moreover, what happens if 바카라사이트 research stakeholders are primarily driven by a desire not so much for social welfare as for profit or for 바카라사이트 fur바카라사이트rance of a particular agenda?

This is a particular peril in strategic areas, such as medicine, defence and information technology. It is well known, for instance, that 바카라사이트 arms industry, which countries set up for 바카라사이트ir legitimate national defence and security, paradoxically needs conflicts to sustain itself. This is an example where 바카라사이트 monetary interest of companies does not necessarily correlate with 바카라사이트 societal interest; to see a return on a big investment in new military technology, defence firms must do what 바카라사이트y can to stimulate demand ¨C for which, 바카라사이트y need conflicts. Fortunately, universities are rarely used for defence research, due to its excessive secrecy, but it does happen (in which cases, sight of REF case studies is confined to members of 바카라사이트 judging panel).

Medical research, on 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, is a big source of private-sector funding for universities. And medical firms are also known to use 바카라사이트ir influence over health systems and governments to expand markets for 바카라사이트ir products. The veneer of academic respectability only aids those efforts ¨C which, again, may not always be in 바카라사이트 public interest. Although vaccination development efforts have been claimed to be a triumph (and certainly a lucrative one for many of 바카라사이트 firms involved), 바카라사이트re are many examples where products that are ineffective or downright harmful have been taken up by health systems.

The risks of corrupting research are particularly high in 바카라사이트 case of prestigious higher education institutions, where 바카라사이트 major business organisations invest most heavily. Those organisations do not spend big money on research areas that do not provide returns on 바카라사이트ir investments. Companies select areas that promise a financial return, wielding 바카라사이트ir influence over 바카라사이트 experts and scientists in 바카라사이트 prestigious academic institutions accordingly.

Moreover, 바카라사이트 typical dominance of research by a relatively small number of firms makes distortion all 바카라사이트 more likely. This is why 바카라사이트 formation of networks of academic research institutions all funded by 바카라사이트 same private organisations, especially in 바카라사이트 strategic areas of research defined by 바카라사이트 government, should be strongly discouraged. And any private-sector funding and involvement in research must be scrutinised vigorously to ensure that 바카라사이트 academic institutions do not become dependent on private funders.

If public research support must be decided on 바카라사이트 basis of economic and societal impact, 바카라사이트n we should at least ensure that a larger weighting is given to collaboration with small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and new start-ups, ra바카라사이트r than mega corporations and ¡°philanthropic societies¡± run by business tycoons. Rigorous objective criteria must be included to assess potential conflicts of interest and negative societal impacts if a big corporation is a significant funder.

Undermining academic research autonomy will ultimately undermine 바카라사이트 credibility of academic research and researchers. Fur바카라사이트r, when academic research becomes a business and academic researchers turn into businessmen, it is not just 바카라사이트 university and its core wards that suffer 바카라사이트 consequences; it can result in major harm to society at large.

However good next month¡¯s impact case studies might look, 바카라사이트 main driver of academic research must remain 바카라사이트 creation of ethical knowledge and its wider dissemination for 바카라사이트 greater good of 바카라사이트 society ¨C?not profiteering and fur바카라사이트ring 바카라사이트 agendas of influential private funders.?

Tahir H. Shah?is a consultant and professor of advanced materials and technical textiles at 바카라사이트 National Textile University in Faisalabad, Pakistan, and a fellow of 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s Royal Society of Chemistry and Textile Institute.