Landscape Review of Interdisciplinary Research in the UK Report to HEFCE and RCUK by Technopolis and the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex September 2016 www.technopolis-group.com Landscape Review of Interdisciplinary Research in the UK Report to HEFCE and RCUK by Technopolis and the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex July, 2016 Anoushka Davé (Technopolis) Michael Hopkins (SPRU) Joshua Hutton (SPRU) Adam Krčál (Technopolis) Peter Kolarz (Technopolis) Ben Martin (SPRU) Kalle Nielsen (Technopolis) Ismael Rafols (SPRU) Daniele Rotolo (SPRU) Paul Simmonds (Technopolis) Andrew Stirling (SPRU) Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Thomson Reuters for supplying Web of Science data on UK academic authors for the Researchers’ survey. Additionally we would like to thank all the interviewees, workshop attendees, survey respondents, and University of Sussex staff who contributed to the piloting of the surveys for their time and thoughtful responses to our questions. We are also very grateful to the advisory group, Dr Sumi David, Professor Roger Kain, Professor Tom McLeish, Dr Ian Viney, and Professor Shearer West, as well as Dr Steven Hill and Charlotte Lester from HEFCE for their advice and support throughout the study. Table of Contents List of abbreviations .............................................................................................................. 6 Executive summary ............................................................................................................... 7 1 Introduction and Literature Review .................................................................................12 1.1 Defining IDR ............................................................................................................13 1.2 Studying IDR ...........................................................................................................14 1.4 Literature on barriers to and incentives for IDR ........................................................15 2 Approach .......................................................................................................................19 2.1 Workshops ..............................................................................................................19 2.2 Interviews ................................................................................................................19 2.3 Surveys ...................................................................................................................19 2.4 Synthesis of findings ................................................................................................20 3 Findings and Analysis ....................................................................................................21 3.1 Context for IDR in the UK ........................................................................................21 3.2 Incentives for IDR ....................................................................................................23 3.3 Barriers against IDR ................................................................................................25 3.4 Facilitators of IDR ....................................................................................................31 4 Conclusions and Policy Considerations .........................................................................34 4.1 Limitations of the study ............................................................................................34 4.2 Lowering the barriers to IDR ....................................................................................34 4.3 Policy considerations for funders .............................................................................35 4.4 Policy considerations for academia..........................................................................36 4.5 Policy considerations for strategic leaders at HEIs ..................................................37 4.6 Conclusion...............................................................................................................37 5 References ....................................................................................................................39 Appendix A Interdisciplinary Research Stakeholder Workshops Report ...............................43 Appendix B Summary of SIStakeholder Interviews ...............................................................62 Appendix C Survey Report ...................................................................................................76 Appendix D Interview Template .......................................................................................... 140 Appendix E Survey Questionnaires .................................................................................... 146 3 Figures Figure 1 Perceptions of incentives for IDR based on responses from researchers, strategic leaders in HEIs, and funders ................................................................................................24 Figure 2 Barriers to IDR as perceived by researchers, strategic leaders in HEIs, and funders .............................................................................................................................................27 Figure 3 Researchers by region (NUTS-1) ...........................................................................84 Figure 4 Responses by job title (a) and ECRs (b) .................................................................85 Figure 5 Responses by HESA contract levels ......................................................................86 Figure 6 Responses by gender .............................................................................................87 Figure 7 Responses by research macro areas .....................................................................88 Figure 8 Importance of IDR (a), involvement with IDR (b), and planning to undertake IDR (c) .............................................................................................................................................90 Figure 9 Involvement with and importance of IDR across research macro areas ..................91 Figure 10 Perceived barriers to IDR by research area ..........................................................92 Figure 10 IDR and careers by research area ........................................................................94 Figure 12 Likelihood of IDR being funded .............................................................................95 Figure 13 Reasons why IDR is perceived as less likely to be funded....................................96 Figure 14 IDR perceived as more likely to be funded ...........................................................98 Figure 15 IDR and collaboration ...........................................................................................99 Figure 16 IDR and research outcomes ............................................................................... 101 Figure 17 Distribution of HEIs by nation in the sample compared with HESA data ............. 106 Figure 18 Response rate by participating HEIs ................................................................... 107 Figure 19 Management roles of respondents ..................................................................... 108 Figure 20 Respondents by gender ..................................................................................... 109 Figure 21 Importance of IDR from (a) the respondent’s own perspective and (b) their perception of whether IDR is a priority for their HEI ............................................................ 110 Figure 22 Factors that motivate prioritisation of IDR in HEIs ............................................... 111 Figure 23 Support of IDR (a) and mechanisms implemented to support IDR in HEIs (b) .... 113 Figure 24 Perceived barriers to IDR by research area ........................................................ 114 Figure 25 IDR and career ................................................................................................... 115 Figure 26 Likelihood of IDR being funded ........................................................................... 116 Figure 27 IDR perceived as less likely to be funded ........................................................... 117 Figure 28 IDR perceived as more likely to be funded ......................................................... 118 Figure 29 IDR and collaboration ......................................................................................... 120 4 Figure 30 IDR and research outcomes ............................................................................... 122 Figure 31 Proportion of respondents by funder research budget ........................................ 124 Figure 32 Job titles of the respondents in the sample (a) and distribution of job titles by type of funder (b) ........................................................................................................................ 125 Figure 33 Respondents by gender (a) and by type of funder (b) ......................................... 126 Figure 34 Importance of IDR from (a) the respondent’s own perspective and (b) their perception of whether IDR is a priority for their organisation ............................................... 127 Figure 35 Support for IDR is perceived as more developed in major funders than in minor funders ..............................................................................................................................