Affiliation:
1. Department of Social Policy, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, 22 George Square, Edinburgh, UK
Abstract
Abstract
The recent moves towards incentivising ‘impact’ within the research funding system pose a growing challenge to academic research practices, charged with producing both scientific, and social impact. This article explores this tension by drawing on interviews with sixty-one UK academics and policymakers involved in publicly-funded knowledge exchange initiatives. The experiences of the interviewed academics point to a functional separation of academic practices into three distinct types: producing traditional research, translating research, and producing policy-oriented research. These three types of practices differ in terms of both the epistemic qualities of the produced knowledge and its legitimacy as valid academic work. Overall, the article argues that the relationship between relevance and excellence of research within the impact agenda is characterised by simultaneous contradiction and co-dependence, leading to hybridisation of academic knowledge production and expansion of the boundaries of policy expertise into the traditionally-academic spaces.
Funder
Principal’s Career Development Scholarship
University of Edinburgh
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Public Administration,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference92 articles.
1. Conceptualising Research Performance;Bazeley;Studies in Higher Education,2010
2. Rethinking Policy ‘Impact’: Four Models of Research-Policy Relations;Boswell;Palgrave Communications,2017
3. Isomorphism, Diffusion and Decoupling: Concept Evolution and Theoretical Challenges;Boxenbaum;The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism,2017
4. What Is the Impact of Political Theory?;Brooks;Political Studies Review,2015
Cited by
35 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献