Katherine E. Smith, J. Bandola-Gill, N. Meer, E. Stewart, R. Watermeyer
{"title":"Debating the UK impact agenda","authors":"Katherine E. Smith, J. Bandola-Gill, N. Meer, E. Stewart, R. Watermeyer","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv11g95dd.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter builds on the debates presented in chapters 1 and 2, providing a more in-depth assessment of critiques of the research impact agenda. This includes concerns expressed in the Stern review and debates regarding the possibility of applying ‘metrics’ to impact. It then considers how the impact agenda has been defended and amended in the context of these critiques.","PeriodicalId":378348,"journal":{"name":"The Impact Agenda","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Impact Agenda","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11g95dd.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This chapter builds on the debates presented in chapters 1 and 2, providing a more in-depth assessment of critiques of the research impact agenda. This includes concerns expressed in the Stern review and debates regarding the possibility of applying ‘metrics’ to impact. It then considers how the impact agenda has been defended and amended in the context of these critiques.