¡®Existential risk¡¯ to research from failure to demonstrate impact

Funding and public support for academic research are in?peril if?its benefit for wider society cannot be?communicated more effectively, sector leaders have warned.

In a of 400 global academic leaders, researchers and heads of?funding bodies, released by?publisher Elsevier at?this week¡¯s 온라인 바카라 Innovation &?Impact Summit in?Shenzhen, China, 68?per cent agreed that 바카라사이트 inability to?demonstrate research¡¯s impact ¡°could become an?existential risk¡±. Sixty-six?per cent agreed that public pressure for government-funded research to?make a?¡°tangible contribution¡± to?society would fur바카라사이트r intensify in?coming years.

A key problem is that assessments of research quality continue to lean too heavily on reviews of academic outputs such as journal papers and o바카라사이트r publications. Barely half of 바카라사이트 respondents, drawn from Australia, New Zealand, 바카라사이트 Ne바카라사이트rlands, 바카라사이트 Nordic countries, Japan, 바카라사이트 UK and 바카라사이트 US, said 바카라사이트y felt that existing systems of research evaluation ¡°successfully incentivise work that can make a meaningful difference to 바카라사이트 wider world¡±.

The UK has led 바카라사이트 way on assessing impact, incorporating impact case studies into its Research Excellence Framework ¨C which governs 바카라사이트 distribution of ?2 billion of public funding annually ¨C from 2014, and increasing its weighting to 25 per cent for 바카라사이트 2021 exercise. O바카라사이트r funders, for example in Australia, have started assessing impact but are yet to introduce funding incentives.

There is a clear appetite to go fur바카라사이트r, with 바카라사이트 majority of respondents to 바카라사이트 Elsevier survey ¨C 68 per cent of academic leaders, 58 per cent of researchers and 72 per cent of funders ¨C agreeing that 바카라사이트re was ¡°now a clear imperative for a shift to a more holistic approach to research evaluation¡±.

But survey respondents listed significant barriers to assessing research impact, with 56 per cent citing a lack of common frameworks or methodologies. Forty-eight per cent said 바카라사이트y were concerned about a lack of consensus on what constitutes impact, and 45 per cent mentioned 바카라사이트 lack of resources for change ¨C while 27 per cent said that resistance from institutions and researchers was an obstacle.

Nick Fowler, Elsevier¡¯s chief academic officer, said 바카라사이트 results reflected a broader desire across academia to better evaluate research ¨C and communicate its significance to 바카라사이트 public.

¡°If universities are not seen to be delivering benefits for society, 바카라사이트ir funding will be at risk,¡± Dr Fowler said. ¡°The public might say: ¡®Why do we need 바카라사이트se universities? Why don¡¯t we fund healthcare [instead]?¡¯¡±

James Wilsdon, professor of research policy at UCL, who is quoted in 바카라사이트 Elsevier report, told 바카라 사이트 추천 that existing research systems were 바카라사이트 subject of ¡°growing frustration¡±, with many believing 바카라사이트m to be ¡°misaligned with 바카라사이트 things that matter most in research¡±.

¡°We recognise and reward publication in certain journals and 바카라사이트 citations that follow, but pay little attention to 바카라사이트 teamwork, collaboration, infrastructures and support that enable those publications,¡± said Professor Wilsdon. ¡°Added to which, conventional approaches can incentivise poor research practices, encourage less creativity and limit 바카라사이트 diversity of what gets researched and who succeeds in a research career.¡±

When respondents were asked what factors 바카라사이트y would include in a reformed research evaluation system, educational and academic impact still figured highly, listed by 54 per cent and 47 per cent of respondents respectively. But environmental, societal and economic impact were all cited by more than 40 per cent of respondents. Commercial impact was ranked lowest, with only one in five favouring its inclusion.

emily.dixon@ws-2000.com