19th Bacchus reading group
Lauronen, J. P. (2022). The epistemic, production, and accountability prospects of social impact: An analysis of strategic research proposals. Research Evaluation, 31(2), 214-225.
Research impact is a simplification of how the research process is influencing society
Negative impact is usually not considered at all, only focus on the positive and salesmanship
There is little space for discussing the nuances of these aims, especially if one is critical of these agendas
The management style of the interaction, is poor and devaluing the contribution are being made
People are trying to sell themselves, without going too far
academics become salesmen
conflict of interests are usually not addressed
Academics have learned to parrot a particular discourse which gets them the funding they want
When it comes to accounting it becomes difficult, and then the nuances are acknowledged (The data material of the mid term reports are much more detailed and the nuances are reflected better, in the Academy of Finland documentation that was the empirical material for the study)
It degenerates into a language game
There is a need for a better way of talking about impact, in relation to disciplinary – and authority and integrity
It is uncertain if we need to get rid of the discourse of impact, or just more sophisticated language
There are some positive dimensions for it, so a better language would solve some of the issues
Research impact theme setting as “kingmakers”, as in setting the agenda
Academics just parrot back the original themes that were already there in the funding call
Policy makers live also in a dynamic world, and there is a difficulty to disentangle oneself from this process if one is to engage with them
There is a constant dialogue and impact creation, and policy is not a static field, and impact is a moving target
The idea of measurement is devaluing and potentially disrupting the co-creation of knowledge production
people learn from each other
Increasing uncertainty and inflation and undermining of authority creates a need for impact narratives to justify academia, if the justification is to be made on utilitarian grounds
Epistemology and ontology, being ideas of the university knowledge domain, and the language of impact is colonised by management and policy jargon, they colonizes academic discourse