Not All Impact is Progress: Embedding Ethics in Impact Cultures

Examining Institutional Responsibilities in Mitigating Negative Research Consequences

Abstract

What is new?

There is a recognition that not all research impact can or will be positive for all parties. As Derrick et al (2018) propose, the detrimental effects of research can have “strongly negative impact” or “Grimpact” and the REF2021 Main Panel D Overview Report notes that in some impact case studies it was not clear how data was gathered from vulnerable groups and whether this data collection may have had harmful effects on those groups.

Should it now be incumbent upon researchers to consider the effects that their research may have and where do institutional responsibilities and the wider UK higher education sector fit into this discussion? Conducting research that has impact while simultaneously ensuring that that impact is generated within an environment that ensures that beneficiaries are not adversely affected is key to a positive research culture, and in this paper we argue that “Grimpact” should be reframed as a matter of institutional responsibility.

What was the approach?

Our examination of this emerging area of thought is informed by the notion of ethics within Aristotelian political thought. This article pulls together data collected at conferences and workshops on the increasing recognition and need for there to be more rigorous institutional processes to support the ethical side of impact development, and shares some recommendations that have emerged from this work.

What is the academic impact?

This discussion aligns with the research culture agenda and recognises the proposals made for impact assessment in the initial decisions for REF2029.

What is the wider impact?

We hope this work will supplement the ongoing sector discussions in this area and inform future development.