Better Societal Impact Evaluation of Research. ENRESSH Brief: Societal Impact

Societal impact has not often been systematically included in research evaluation procedures. Where societal impact is included in research evaluation, it is often defined in a restrictive way relating exclusively to directly measurable economic returns. This limitation is especially important for research, which does not aim to generate direct profits but interacts with, adds value to, and makes sense of, society. This policy brief presents ten recommendations for the evaluation of societal impact with a special focus on how its evaluation can better facilitate research. These recommendations are based on the findings of a long-term multi-country project examining the interactions and roles of research and society across Europe with a special focus on the social sciences and humanities (SSH). Country case studies, conceptual analyses, and policy perspectives are presented in the edited volume “Accountability in Academic Life: European Perspectives on Societal Impact Evaluation” (Edward Elgar, 2023)

Über die Bedeutsamkeit linguistischen Wissens im privatwirtschaftlichen Arbeitsfeld

Until today, linguistics as an academic field does not aim at responding to the expectations of the job market. However, on the backdrop of an increasing interrelation of politics, economy and science, questions as to the applicability of linguistics to labour processes and the employability of linguists are raised and need to be answered. In analysing data gained in the course of 21 interviews conducted with linguists working in the private sector of economy, several issues have shown to be of major interest. This paper addresses firstly in what ways linguistics was likely to be seen as relevant for the jobs held by the various interviewees from the point of view of their employers, which is then compared to the interviewees' own evaluations on the relevance of linguistic knowledge for their daily work. On the one hand it becomes clear that there are differences between the three comparable situations in which the analysed transfer of knowledge takes place (Quereinstieg, Schnittstellenjob, "sprachperformativer Job"). One the other hand linguistic expertise in the extra-academic field seems to be most salient or approved of when it comes to language competence in text production or communicative situations, which further complicates the attempt to make linguistics transparent for non-linguists

Societal impact, innovation, or public value? Switzerlands approach to research impact evaluation and the SSH

Switzerland has no formal research evaluation framework, and evaluation differs from institution to institution. Nevertheless, there are national discourses about research evaluation and about what, in other countries, is called “societal impact”. Drawing on interviews with higher education stakeholders, we show that the concept of “societal impact” has not gained ground in Switzerland. Rather, the science policy discourse revolves around the term “innovation”. The dual system in (higher) education in Switzerland leads to a clear distinction between applied and basic research; having a demonstrable impact on society is within the realm of the first of these. However, in a direct democracy such as Switzerland, civic functions of research influence the perception of academia, especially in the social sciences and humanities. The research-society nexus, however, is not perceived as something that can be captured by the idea of “societal impact” in any meaningful way. Creating public value rather than impact is at the heart of Swiss science policy

The morphology of urban landscapes

Urban morphology investigates settlement and urban forms. These do not change overnight, but in a process that follows certain principles. There is hardly anything more complex and contradictory than a city. Precisely because of this complexity, there is little agreement on definitions and procedural methods. This applies in particular to urban planning, which is not only concerned with analysis, but also with the design and transformation of cities. A variety of different urban morphological approaches exist today. Authors from various areas of research and practice investigate the relevance of the morphological perspective in the field of contemporary urban landscapes. They link historical roots and current approaches and explain the relationship between analysis and design

Morphologie von Stadtlandschaften

Auch als englische Ausgabe ("The Morphology of Urban Landscapes" 978-3-496-01648-9) und beide Ausgaben auch als E-Books erhältlich.Die Erforschung der Formen unserer Stadtlandschaften und die Suche nach Wegen zu ihrer zukunftsfähigen Weiterentwicklung sind dringende Herausforderungen. Allerdings gibt es kaum etwas Komplexeres und Widersprüchlicheres als städtische Siedlungsformen. So erstaunt es nicht, dass sich die aktuellen stadtmorphologischen Ansätze in ihren Begriffsbestimmungen, ihrer Methodik und ihren Anwendungsgebieten stark unterscheiden. Um hier eine Übersicht zu gewinnen, greift dieses Buch unterschiedliche Stränge der Stadtmorphologie auf. 19 Autor:innen thematisieren Beeinflussungen, aber auch Differenzen und präsentieren jüngste Erkenntnisse aus Forschung und Praxis

Manifesto for a better societal impact evaluation

In this chapter, ENRESSH collaborators write a “Manifesto for a Better Societal Impact” Evaluation. In this, authors have extracted key principles based on some conclusions from the individual country reports which are broken down and/or extrapolated into generalisable findings drawing from the cross-national comparison. In doing so, this manifesto explores what scholars and policymakers from other European countries, and indeed from far wider international backgrounds, can learn from those countries’ experiences and the cross-national comparison. The chapter also goes beyond analysis, in providing a series of condensed recommendations for the evaluation of societal impact in the SSH with a special focus on how the evaluation can impact the work of academics in a positive way. In this collaborative task, we have sought to simultaneously respect disciplinary differences in knowledge production practices as well as in societal functions of research, while making this process as visible as possible