Memorandum 25
Submission from the Arts & Humanities
Research Council (AHRC)
SUMMARY OF
KEY POINTS
— Research in the arts and humanities
must be at the heart of government policy. We cannot confront
the most pressing global policy challenges today without tapping
into the expertise of arts and humanities researchers.— We
recommend the inclusion of the word "research" in the
title of the Minister of State for Science and Innovation. The
AHRC reiterates the RCUK response to this inquiry, where it warns
that the creation of a Department for Science (and Research) could
potentially lead to science and research issues becoming isolated
from the day to day concerns of individual Government departments.— Inclusion
of arts and humanities expertise is in line with a wide array
of existing guidelines, advice and practice in policymaking. For
example, Chief Scientific Adviser guidance for the use of research
in policymaking recommends using "philosophical and wider
social research" where appropriate.
— We believe the Council for Science
and Technology (CST) has carried out a useful function in encouraging
all research—including the arts and humanities—to
play its full part in Government policy.
— Interaction between academia and
policymakers could be facilitated by making researchers more aware
of the evidence needs of government. All government departments
should publish their research priorities and needs.
— We ask the Committee to consider
ways to encourage greater coordination of all policy-relevant
research to encourage joined-up Government and recommend the creation
of an Arts and Humanities Chief Adviser.
— The IUSS Select Committee plays an
exemplary role in scrutinising science and engineering policy.
We believe that the Committee has a valuable and influential role
in overseeing arts and humanities research, including its role
in Government evidence-based policy.
INTRODUCTION
1. The AHRC welcomes this opportunity to
share its views on putting science and engineering at the heart
of Government policy, and looks forward to working with the Committee
on matters relating to research in the future.
2. The AHRC supports research within a huge subject
domain from traditional humanities subjects, such as history,
philosophy, theology, modern languages and English literature,
to the creative and performing arts. The AHRC funds research and
postgraduate study within the UK's Higher Education Institutions
and in a number of Independent Research Organisations, typically
national museums and galleries. In addition, the AHRC is involved
in funding and shaping numerous collaborative research programmes
with other Research Councils and organisations such as the Technology
Strategy Board, and in fostering the economic impact of arts and
humanities research.
3. Research in the arts and humanities must
be at the heart of government policy. Without it, evidence-based
policymaking will be impoverished, bereft of ethical, cultural,
legal, philosophical and historical dimensions. The lessons of
GM, BSE, or MMR are that technological fixes are not enough. We
must understand the complex social and cultural aspects of these
challenges. As a 2001 Council for Science and Technology
report on arts and humanities research concluded: "science
and technology policy is concerned to a striking extent with questions
which engage both the sciences and the arts and humanities …
arts and humanities and science and technology need each other".[113]
4. We cannot confront the most pressing
global challenges today without tapping into an ethical, cultural
and historical understanding of our world. Whether it is globalisation
or improving our economic and emotional well being, adjusting
to ageing and the increasing diversity of the population, or the
renewal of Britain's constitution and democratic institutions,
all these complex issues require expertise across all subject
domains. The arts and humanities community can play a vital role
in helping us understand these problems.[114]
BACKGROUND TO
THE AHRC SUBMISSION
5. The AHRC's response to this inquiry is
produced in conjunction with Research Councils UK (RCUK). As
well as contributing to the cross-Council response, we agreed
with our RCUK colleagues to submit a parallel AHRC document. The
AHRC submission is intended to give greater detail and evidence
about specific issues relating directly to arts and humanities
research, and to argue for our explicit inclusion within any discussion
of the UK's research capability and contributions that the research
base make towards the development of public policy. To avoid
duplication, we have tried to avoid repeating the points made
in the RCUK response but we would like to stress that we endorse
all of the recommendations made in the RCUK submission.
6. The AHRC submission has taken "government
policy" to mean all government policy, not just topics directly
referring to science, technology and engineering issues.
7. To highlight the public policy impact
of arts and humanities research, we consulted some of our community
for a selection of examples of research that has had a tangible
policy impact. We include a short selection of some of the 14 case
studies in this document. All of the examples can all be found
on our website: http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/About/Policy
Humanities and human rights.
Legal research remains at the heart of 60 years
of landmark human rights law and institutions. The incorporation
of the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic UK law,
through the Human Rights Act 1998, has led to greater judicial
reliance upon academic commentary. The expertise of the academy
is a valuable asset, with academics providing an advisory capacity
for Government, judges, practitioners and public authorities.
For example, the theories of Piet Eeckhout, Professor of European
Law at King's College London and an Associate Member of Matrix
Chambers, were adopted in a recent landmark European Court of
Justice case involving the UN Security Council.
8. Across Government and opinion formers,
there is a growing commitment to arts and humanities research
in policymaking. For example, the Chief Scientific Adviser guidance
for the use of research in policymaking recommends using "philosophical
and wider social research" where appropriate.[115]
Similarly, a report last year by the European Commission promoted
the use of the humanities in policymaking:
"There is a vast store of new knowledge
and information in the results of the projects funded in the area
of the socio-economic sciences and humanities under the European
Framework Programmes of Research. Harnessing this information
in order to inform policy-making is a major priority".[116]
9. Recent reports have highlighted ways
to improve the relationship between academia and Government. The
2008 British Academy report Punching our Weight, from
a group chaired by the AHRC's chairman Professor Sir Alan Wilson,
makes a series of recommendations for how arts, humanities and
social science researchers can actively increase and improve collaboration
with policy makers.[117]
The Council for Science and Technology's (CST) Report on How
Academia and Government can work together also made numerous
recommendations about how Government and academia can improve
and develop engagement.[118]
Our submission builds on these reports.
SPECIFIC RESPONSES
TO THE
COMMITTEE'S
POINTS
Whether the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Science and
Innovation and the Council for Science and Technology put science
and engineering at the heart of policy-making and whether there
should be a Department for Science.
10. We are not persuaded that there is a
need for a new Department for Science. The AHRC reiterates the
RCUK response to this inquiry, where it warns that the creation
of a Department for Science (and Research) could potentially lead
to science and research issues becoming isolated from the day
to day concerns of individual Government departments. Evidence-based
policymaking should be integral to the work of all public bodies
and not the responsibility of one individual department.
11. We are encouraged that Lord Drayson's recent
appointment as Minister of State for Science and Innovation has
been made at Cabinet level. We recommend the inclusion of the
word "research" in the Minister's title, in order to
reflect the Government's ongoing commitment to supporting the
broad spectrum of science and research within the UK. This further
reflects Conclusion 1 of this Committee's inquiry into the
science budget allocations:
"Given the range of programmes and disciplines
covered by the Science Budget, the name is somewhat misleading,
especially since the transfer of AHRC into the budget in 2005.
We recommend that DIUS change the name of the Science Budget to
the Science and Research Budget to reflect the inclusion of arts,
humanities and knowledge transfer which we note matches the welcome
change in title of the DIUS official in charge of the budget to
the Director General for Science and Research".[119]
12. We believe the CST carries out a useful
function in encouraging all research—including the arts
and humanities—to play its full part in Government policy.
The CST's recent report on How Academia and Government can
Work Together made helpful recommendations about how Government
should make greater use of various bodies (including the AHRC)
to enhance access to valuable sources of external academic capacity.[120]
We look forward to seeing the Government's response to this report.
In the lead up to the creation of the AHRC in 2005, the CST also
published a valuable report on the role of arts and humanities
research in science and technology policy.[121]
13. We cannot comment on the work of the
Cabinet Sub-Committee on Science and Innovation as their work
is not in the public domain. We appreciate that Cabinet papers
are confidential and cannot be made available through the Freedom
of Information Act.[122]
We do, however, think it should be in the public interest to
know more about the work of the Committee and whether the research
community can assist the Committee in any way.
Policy advice on Islam and radicalization.
The AHRC/ESRC Religion and Society Research Programme
has included, among a large number of projects, work with Muslim
groups and the Metropolitan Police to challenge religiously endorsed
violence. The £12.3 million programme brings together
arts and humanities scholars with social scientists, to address
complex and topical issues of belief, culture, society and religion.
In 2007 the programme director, Professor Linda Woodhead,
was a member of the commissioning panel on the joint ESRC/AHRC/Foreign
and Commonwealth Office Programme on Islam, Radicalization
and Violence—A Critical Reassessment.
How Government formulates science and engineering
policy (strengths and weaknesses of the current system)
14. The AHRC also stresses that any discussion
of science and engineering policy should include the arts and
humanities so as to reflect the broad spectrum of research supported
by the Science and Research Budget. In this respect we draw the
Committee's attention to the fact that at present the AHRC is
currently involved in funding collaborative research with the
other Research Councils (except the Science and Technology Facilities
Council).
15. The AHRC maintains its commitment to supporting
world-class research—underpinned by the principles of peer
review—which directly helps to maintain the UK's position
as a world-leader in the field of academic research. This position
can only be strengthened by more robust and explicit inclusion
of the wide-ranging benefits that arts and humanities research
can bring to the UK's science and research policy.
16. The benefits can be both direct and
indirect. The 2008 British Academy report on fostering academic
policy advice discusses the direct contribution made by certain
disciplines, and goes on to state that "for other disciplines
(literary, cultural, philosophical and historical) the contributions
can be less direct, but no less important, increasing understanding
and knowledge, along with subtle changes in attitudes and assumptions".[123]
We welcome this report's recommendations that Government departments
should publish departmental research priorities and facilitate
increased dialogue with the academic community to build upon existing
engagement.
Gender, sexuality and public policy.
The AHRC Centre for Law, Gender and Sexuality
at Keele University has made 15 separate responses to Government
policy consultations since 2004, and has as one its central strategic
aims to "promote the exchange of ideas on matters relating
to policy, practice, and activism". Consultation subjects
the centre has responded on include welfare reform, hybrid embryos,
human trafficking, discrimination law, forced marriage and rape
law reform.
17. The Council for Science and Technology's
2001 report Imagination and Understanding made the
important point that the greatest challenges facing the UK require
engagement between the arts, humanities, science and technology.[124]
The report argues that this is because science and technology
policy is "concerned to a striking extent with questions
which engage both the sciences and the arts and humanities".
The CST study concludes that the development of research policy
would be "strengthened by the participation of the arts and
humanities in these discussions … including the discussion
of new information and communication strategies, and of their
consequences for UK and global society". This would build
upon the aims stated within the 1999 White Paper Modernising
Government, to make policy-making more joined up, strategic
and forward looking—explicitly calling for better use of
evidence and research in policy making.[125]
We hope that that the IUSS Committee will recognise and build
on these recommendations in their inquiry.
18. We ask the Committee to consider ways
to encourage greater coordination of all research for evidence-based
policy making within Government. In this context, we would like
to recommend appointing a Chief Adviser for the Arts and Humanities
with a strong track record in bringing research to bear on the
development of public policy; ideally with a cross Government
remit. RAE 2008 showed that arts and humanities researchers
represent 27% of the UK's active researchers and scored better
than any other area in terms of 4* contribution, a position for
which the AHRC has independent empirical support in its analysis
of a sample of international journals that shows the UK's arts
and humanities researchers produce almost as much world-class
research as the USA, with six times our population. Why should
Government not benefit from the impact these researchers should
make on policy formulation and implementation, as mediated by
a Chief Adviser for the Arts and Humanities?
19. Interaction between academia and policymakers
could be facilitated by making researchers more aware of the evidence
needs of government. The 2008 British Academy report on policy
making recommended that all government departments publish their
research priorities and needs to "facilitate interaction
and dialogue with the academic research community".[126]
A number of departments already do this but this should be implemented
across Government.
Policy lessons from history.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown invited historian
Professor Sir David Cannadine to review Government secrecy rules.
Announced by the PM in 2007, the study examines a possible relaxation
of the 30-years rule on access to government documents. The study
also involves Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre and Sir Joe
Pilling, a former Permanent Secretary in Northern Ireland. David
Cannadine is also on the advisory board of the History and Policy
think tank, a group of historians, MPs and journalists. The results
of the secrecy study will be made public in January 2008.
Whether the views of the science and engineering
community are, or should be, central to the formulation of Government
policy, and how the success of any consultation is assessed
20. The views of the entire research community
should be central to the formulation of Government policy. Not
just science and engineering—every discipline can play a
part. We strongly endorse the Government guidance on scientific
analysis in policymaking which encourages the use of different
subjects relevant to the specific policy challenge:
"the potential for advice to be strengthened
by harnessing evidence from all disciplines should not be discounted,
particularly in areas of public concern…. The balance of
research methods used to generate the data will also depend upon
the issue in question. Research methods include … philosophical
and wider social research".[127]
21. The AHRC's funding comes from the Science
and Research Budget, and many of the challenges currently facing
the UK and the world present distinct opportunities for interdisciplinary
collaboration in the search for solutions; in particular we refer
to the 2008 Cabinet Office report on strategic priorities
for Britain.[128]
22. Policy-relevant research funded by the
Research Councils frequently cuts across disciplinary boundaries.
Advice and research for policymakers do not fit into a neat category
of science and engineering. The AHRC is actively involved in
collaborative research programmes with every other Research Council
(with, so far, the exception of the STFC). This ensures arts and
humanities research inputs into fields as diverse as ageing, synthetic
biology, science and heritage, knowledge transfer, environmental
change, the digital economy, museums and galleries, language based
area studies and also lifelong health and wellbeing.
Ethics in biology and medicine.
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is an exemplar
of the effective use of different disciplines in policy advice
on new developments in biology and medicine. As well as scientists
and medical practicioners, the Council includes experts from the
humanities such as lawyers, philosophers, and theologians who
have worked on topics ranging from xenotransplantation to stem
cell research. The Council's diversity of expertise is a major
contributing factor to their policy impact.
23. Chief Scientific Advisers in Government
departments play a valuable role in ensuring that evidence from
research is fed into policy formulation. There is, however, a
diverse array of individuals responsible for research within Government
departments and agencies, including Chief Statisticians, Chief
Economists, Chief Social Researchers and Chief Scientific Advisers.
There are also 1,900 lawyers across Government whose work
needs to be informed by the latest legal research and practice.
We ask the Committee to consider ways to encourage greater coordination
of all research to encourage joined-up Government and bring together
all relevant expertise for the policy challenges of the twenty
first century.
24. The effectiveness of consulting the
research community should be assessed by follow-up studies and
focus groups of academic contributors and government policy officials.
Were the academics listened to by officials or was their advice
ignored? Did the policy advice from the academics meet the needs
of officials? Where and how did responses have an impact? It
would be helpful for the academic experts to obtain feedback so
that they can learn from mistakes and successes. Positive feedback
can also assist scholars who are increasingly being asked by their
funders for evidence of wider economic, social, cultural and policy
impacts.
The Home Office commissioned Professor Kim Knott,
the Director of the AHRC's Diasporas, Migration and Identities
Research Programme to conduct a review of arts and humanities
research literature relating to The Roots, Practices and Consequences
of Terrorism. The review focused on the importance of culture
and identity for understanding the roots, practises and consequences
of terrorism. The study provided a framework of contributory factors
and recommendations for future research and policy implications.
The case for a regional science policy (versus
national science policy) and whether the Haldane principle needs
updating
25. Like all Research Councils, the AHRC
has a UK-wide remit and we do not allocate funds according to
regional or devolved policies. Our Royal Charter does, however,
have an explicit remit to promote and support "the exploitation
of research outcomes and research relating to cultural aspects
of the different parts of our United Kingdom." Arts and
humanities research plays a central role in understanding the
cultures, language and history of the interlocking parts of the
UK.[129]
The morality of climate change policies.
Professor John Broome, Professor of Moral Philosophy,
Oxford University (a member of the AHRC peer review college and
former AHRC award holder), was commissioned as part of HM Treasury's
Stern Review into the Economics of Climate Change to write on
Valuing policies in response to climate change: some ethical
issues.
Engaging the public and increasing public confidence
in science and engineering policy
26. Public engagement must involved a greater
understanding of the social and cultural aspects of science and
engineering policy and move "up stream" at the earliest
stages of policy formulation. We commend the breadth of the DIUS
strategy A Vision for Science and Society (2008) which
recognised the role of all disciplines in wider public and policy
engagement for the benefit of society. The preface mentions that
"by science we mean all-encompassing knowledge based on scholarship
and research … including the arts and humanities."
The role of GO-Science, DIUS and other Government
departments, charities, learned societies, Regional Development
Agencies, industry and other stakeholders in determining UK science
and engineering policy
27. The AHRC has no additional information to
add to the RCUK response to this question.
Policies to prevent torture.
The Ministry of Justice approached the AHRC-project
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the National Institutions under
the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on Torture to hold
workshops involving various stakeholders, including Her Majesty's
Inspectorate of Prisons. Led by Professor Rachel Murray from the
University of Bristol, they have also worked with the UN Sub-Committee
for the Prevention of Torture and the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office on the global adoption of the protocol.
How Government science and engineering policy
should be scrutinised
28. The IUSS Select Committee already plays
a valuable role in scrutinising science and engineering policy.
We believe that the Committee has an influential role in overseeing
arts and humanities research, bolstered by the diverse expertise
of the Committee's members that includes graduates in philosophy
and classics, and a former editor of History Today.
December 2008
113 Imagination and Understanding: A Report on the
Arts and Humanities in Relation to Science and Technology (Council
for Science and Technology, 2001). Back
114
See Realising Britain's Potential; Future Strategic Challenges
for Britain (The Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office, February 2008)
for an overview of cross-cutting priorities for the UK Government.
Back
115
Guidelines on Scientific Analysis in Policy Making (HM Government,
2005). Back
116
Scientific Evidence for Policy Making, European Commission 2008.
Back
117
Punching our Weight; The Humanities and Social Science4s in Public
Policy Making (British Academy, 2008). Back
118
How Academia and Government Can Work Together (Council
for Science and Technology, 2008). Back
119
Science Budget Allocations; Fourth Report Innovation (Universities,
Science and Skills Committee, House of Commons 2008). Back
120
How Academia and Government Can Work Together (Council
for Science and Technology, 2008). Back
121
Imagination And Understanding: the Arts and Humanities in Relation
to Science And Technology (Council for Science and Technology,
2001). Back
122
A Guide to Cabinet and Cabinet Committee Business (Cabinet Office
Secretariat, 2008). Back
123
Punching our Weight; The Humanities and Social Science4s in Public
Policy Making (British Academy, 2008). Back
124
Imagination And Understanding: the Arts and Humanities in Relation
to Science And Technology (Council for Science and Technology,
2008). Back
125
The Modernising Government White Paper (Cabinet Office, 1999). Back
126
Punching Our Weight; The Humanities and Social Sciences in Public
Policy Making (British Academy 2008). Back
127
Guidelines on Scientific Analysis in Policy Making (HM Government,
2005). Back
128
Realising Our Potential; Future Strategic Challenges for Britain
(Cabinet Office 2008). Back
129
Arts and Humanities Research Council Royal Charter (AHRC, 2005). Back
| 
