The impact agenda and the study of British politics
This article attempts to discern the nature of impact in relation to the British politics sub-field of political studies. It reviews evidence from REF2014 to establish how political scientists working in this area understood and tried to demonstrate impact. It critically appraises how the impact agenda is affecting how research into British politics is prioritised, undertaken and disseminated, and questions whether this is a good thing for the sub-discipline. The implications of this for the shape of British politics research going forward are considered. While welcoming the possibility of a re-centring of scholarly attention on British politics, the article cautions against a retreat to the parameters of the British Political Tradition and the Westminster Model view.
KeywordsImpact Engagement Research Excellence Framework (REF) British politics Westminster Model
I am very grateful to Jonathan Dean, the anonymous reviewers and the journal editors for their comments on a draft of this article.
- Collini, S. 2012. What are universities for? London: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Cushion, S., and R. Sambrook. 2015. The ‘horse-race’ contest dominated TV news election coverage. In UK election analysis 2015: Media, voters and the campaign, ed. D. Jackson, and E. Thorsen. Bournemouth: CSJCC.Google Scholar
- Dean, J. 2016. Do academics have a Corbyn problem? PSA blog, 3 October. https://www.psa.ac.uk/insight-plus/blog/do-academics-have-corbyn-problem.
- Davies, H., Nutley, S., & Walter, I. 2005. Assessing the impact of social science research: Conceptual, methodological and practical issues. Discussion paper for ESRC Symposium on Assessing Non-Academic Impact of Research May 2005. Retrieved 15 April 2017, from http://www.odi.org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/events-documents/4960.pdf.
- Holmwood, J. 2017. Monstrous markets: neo-liberalism, populism and the demise of the public university. In Here be Monsters’: Science, ed. Brigitte Nerlich, Alexander Smith, Sarah Hartley, and Sujatha Raman. Politics and the Dilemmas of Openness, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
- Holmwood, J. (forthcoming) Open access, ‘publicity’ and democratic knowledge. In Martin Eve and Jonathan Grey (eds) Constellations of Knowledge: The Past, Present and Future of Open Access and Scholarly Communication. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Jennings, W. and Lodge, M. 2016. The Failures of Political Science: Trump, Brexit and beyond. Political Insight blog, 13 November. https://www.psa.ac.uk/insight-plus/blog/failures-political-science-trump-brexit-and-beyond
- Kenny, C. 2015. The impact of academia on Parliament: 45 percent of Parliament-focused impact case studies were from social sciences. London School of Economics impact blog, http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2015/10/19/the-impact-of-uk-academia-on-parliament/.
- Mance, H. 2016. Britain has had enough of experts, says Gove. Financial Times, 3 June. https://www.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c.
- REF2014 2015. REF 2014: Overview Report by Main Panel C and Sub-Panels 16–26. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/expanel/member/Main%20Panel%20C%20overview%20report.pdf.
- Watermeyer, R. and Lewis, J. 2017. Why universities and academics should bother with public engagement. The Conversation, 22 February. https://theconversation.com/why-universities-and-academics-should-bother-with-public-engagement-72550.