1. Impact from a Research Council perspective Dr Alison Wall, Associate Director, Impact, EPSRC

2. Impact – why we exist.... EPSRC Charter to advance knowledge and technology (including the promotion and support of the exploitation of research outcomes), and provide trained scientists and engineers, which meet the needs of users... thereby contributing to the economic competitiveness of Our United Kingdom and the quality of life ; RCUK Excellence with Impact continuing to invest in the best research, people and infrastructure; whilst aiming to enhance the impact of that funding on society.

3. What does “Impact” mean for Research Councils Academic impact –The demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to academic advances, across and within disciplines, including significant advances in understanding, methods, theory and application. Economic and societal impacts –The demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy –Fostering global economic performance, and specifically the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom –Increasing the effectiveness of public services and policy –Enhancing quality of life, health and creative output.

5. Role of the Research Councils To sponsor/do research and related postgraduate training Impact often not delivered directly from our support – may be many years after our intervention Consider how to facilitate impact at all times/levels in development of our strategies, portfolios and activities

6. Research Councils Approaches Starting point: focus on beneficiaries Leading culture change Systematic data gathering Tools for impact assessment Using impact assessments to support the case for continued investment in research

7. Background 2006 Warry Report - Research Councils needed to do more to demonstrate and increase impact 2007 RCUK Excellence with Impact –Baseline economic impact assessment –User satisfaction survey –Pathways to Impact on research grants –Knowledge Transfer portal

8. Statement of Expectations Research Councils give considerable flexibility and autonomy: project definition, management, collaboration, participation, promotion and the dissemination of research outputs In return, we expect researchers to: demonstrate an awareness of the wider environment and context of heir research demonstrate an awareness of the social and ethical implications of their research, and take account of public attitudes towards those issues engage actively with the public at both the local and national levels about their research and its broader implications

9. Statement of Expectations identify potential benefits and beneficiaries from the outset, and through the project(s) maintain professional networks that extend beyond their own discipline and research community publish results widely – considering the academics, user and public audiences for research outcomes exploit results where appropriate, in order to secure social and economic return to the UK manage collaborations, to secure maximum impact without restricting the progression of research ensure that staff and students develop research, vocational and entrepreneurial skills that are matched to the demands of their career paths take responsibility for the curation, management and exploitation of data work in partnership with the Research Councils for the benefit of the UK

10. Pathways to Impact Thinking about, setting out an initial plan and asking for resources to support economic and societal impact-related activities on a research grant – project specific. What will be done to ensure that potential beneficiaries have the opportunity to engage with this research? Not being fully exploited yet. Opportunities: for secondments, workshops, targeted reports/publications, market research.... Flexible like our other grant funding. The Research Councils reserve the right to withhold the award of grant until Pathways to Impact are of a standard appropriate for the project.

11. Access to research outputs/outcomes Access to research outputs –Moving towards Gold Open Access –Improving access to research data –Research Outputs systems

12. Research Outcomes System New Research Outcomes System for EPSRC, ESRC, BBSRC and AHRC – Autumn this year To include: –Publications –Collaboration/Partnership –Dissemination and Communication –IP and Exploitation –Award/Recognition –Staff Development –Further Funding –Impact –Others RCs are working with HEFCE to ensure that Outcomes and Outputs collected are in line with the classifications to be used for the Research Excellence Framework

13. Evaluations and impact studies Demonstrating and understanding impact –Evaluations and impact studies –Learning from success stories (REF)

14. Tools for impact assessment Drawing on strong research evaluation traditions –Peer review; data analysis; surveys; logic approaches Treasury Green Book economic impact analyses eg BBSRC institute studies Case studies: RCUK examples: –People and skills, Partnerships, Public policy, SMEs Individual RC case studies –Grant specific, Individual, Team, Centre, Programme... Increasing focus on policy impact Pushing boundaries: conceptual impact (ESRC) Outline tool-kit of methodologies and approaches from meta-evaluation (RCUK Policy Fellow)

15. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Policy: PROTECT Delivering Impact

16. Strategic Plan goals

17. EPSRC Delivery Plan Major socio-economic challenges and national importance as part of shaping our whole portfolio Consideration of potential impact and how to realise it by all the researchers we sponsor Less academic facing exploitation schemes Major partnerships with sectors and other RD&D funders Move to be a research sponsor and stage-gating 17

18. Policy: PROTECT EPSRC’s portfolio

19. Policy: PROTECT Developing the shape of the portfolio We are now assessing research areas within the portfolio and taking decisions about the relative scale of our investment in these areas. In looking at the relationship between research areas we consider the quality of UK research in the area, its national importance, and the existing capacity in the UK (see examples of considerations below) Implementation underway – publication 20 July of first research areas assessed QualityImportanceCapacity International standingImpact on UK economySize of EPSRC investment Transformative or disruptive potential Enable future development of emerging industries Size and shape of non- EPSRC investment Unique capability for UK Contribution to societal challenges User need Key to health of other research disciplines

20. Also in the new delivery plan Follow-on Fund User-led approaches (e.g. Industrial CASE) Exploitation – working with our partners (TSB, ETI, HEIF…) Bringing companies together on a sector basis to agree national research challenges Enhanced researcher mobility between research disciplines and with users Create spaces for users and researchers to work together – aligned to national priorities More accessible data and knowledge about our research and its outcomes 20

21. Delivering Impact SWOT Strengths Foundation of research excellence An entrepreneurial approach in universities High level of collaboration in our research and training portfolio Links with TSB/RCs and other partners are strong Good links to major companies Supportive culture for interdisciplinary research; important for users Knowledge of our portfolio Pathways to Impact encourages all applications to consider potential impact Weaknesses Lots of KT funding routes – confusing Possible funding gaps downstream in the innovation chain Absorptive capacity of UK industry is in decline; industry demand and R&D spend is low Limited engagement with early-adopter SMEs Lack of information on outputs and outcomes from EPSRC’s funding 21

22. Delivering Impact SWOT Opportunities Impact in REF Attractiveness of UK research base to inward investors, students and researchers Wakeham review efficiencies in Universities Joined up view in BIS – Sir Adrian Smith EPSRC move to a sponsor, developing leaders, shaping capability Focus on the big challenges Providing information on project outcomes/outputs (ROP/GoW, data) Engagement with entrepreneurial SMEs Threats Globalisation and increased competition from emerging economies. Other OECD countries are increasing their investment in research. Cheaper to place R&D investment overseas. Changes in regional funding Number of stakeholders overseeing the innovation landscape Loss of visibility and hard for us to find/monitor embedded impact activities Embedding – seen by community as too impact focussed – or stepping back Inconsistency of message and language between Research Councils 22

23. End of presentation

24. Common characteristics of problematic quality Pathways to Impact Common characteristics of high quality Pathways to Impact Vagueness, lack of specificity and clear deliverables. Activities are not project specific, but routine activities for University research posts or too much focus on track record. Lack of consideration of broader beneficiaries, likely impacts and appropriate mechanisms. Activities narrowly focused and end focused. Good consideration of the relevant beneficiaries, user needs and tailored activities Clear description of deliverables and milestones. Involvement of users from the outset. Clear commitment for realising both academic and non academic research impacts.