Putting Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy - Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee Contents


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.

    Understanding terrorism.

    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


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Prepared 23 July 2009