Universities are ivory towers no longer (if ever they were) – academics are now increasingly required to demonstrate their contributions to the wider world. Often referred to as ‘impact’, this term is now understood to mean any instance where academic research produces something other than pure knowledge, and so has some influence on the economy or society, or political and cultural life. Impact has become a popular additional measurement of the ‘usefulness’ of research for research funders internationally and, since 2014, the governments in the UK. ‘Usefulness’ of research in this context is based on the increasing demand for detailed accounting and justification of public spending but also international competitiveness based on collaborations between universities and industry (Hicks, 2012).

The inclusion of impact as an assessment category in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) in the UK marked the first time that the work of academics was going to be assessed on criteria beyond the research environment and publications as measured by peer review. The UK led the way with the introduction of the Research Selectivity Exercise in 1986. Similar performance-based research funding systems have since been introduced in ten countries (Hicks, 2012; see also Jonkers and Zacharewicz, 2016, and Zacharewicz et al, 2018). While the first Research Selectivity Exercise in 1986 was regarded as relatively ‘light touch’ with only five outputs required per department (Gilroy and McNamara, 2009). Subsequent research assessment exercises in the UK, carried out every three to four years, became increasingly transparent and time-consuming (HEFCE, 2008).

The inclusion of impact in the REF2014 was greeted with scepticism by many academics, who highlighted the difficulties in defining, measuring and attributing impact (see Martin, 2011). Many of these criticisms reflect the difficulties faced by academics trying to influence policy-making more generally and thus can be found in the literature on evidence-based policymaking (EBPM) since the 1960s (for the most recent iterations see Head, 2016; Cairney, 2016; Parkhurst, 2017; French, 2019). Key barriers are timeliness, fit, trust/support and communication. More appropriate communication, the use of knowledge brokers as well as ongoing engagement with policymakers are the most frequently cited solutions to the problem (see Cairney, 2016; Reed, 2016; French, 2019).