Universities espouse a universalist approach to creating and accessing research-based knowledge. However, as Helen Kara and Petra Boynton argue, seen from the outside these claims are hollow.

Perhaps you are familiar with the phrase ‘computer says no’, but what about ‘institution says no’?

Unless, like us, you work with institutions from outside, as we do with some universities and would like to do with research funders and other research institutions, this may be less familiar. In this post we want to highlight the obstacles we encounter working with universities and the barriers preventing independent researchers from accessing research funding, explain what we think needs to change and why, and how this change could come about.

In the UK, if you are a researcher working outside a research institution, you are not eligible to apply for government-generated research funding. The relevant institution is UKRI, which, despite its assertions of equality, diversity, and inclusion, continually says ‘no’ to independent researchers. Even though its stated aim is to ‘foster a world-class research and innovation system, “by everyone, for everyone”’, it still says ‘no’ to applications from qualified, experienced, competent, networked, independent researchers.

In the UK, if you are a researcher working outside a research institution, you are not eligible to apply for government-generated research funding.

Many of these practitioners, through working across multiple scholarly spaces, may have considerably more skills and experience than academic colleagues, many of whom have only worked within university settings. They may have started their career within universities or other research-active institutions, or always have pursued a scholarly career outside of these spaces.

Many of these practitioners, through working across multiple scholarly spaces, may have considerably more skills and experience than academic colleagues

For example, Petra was a Senior Lecturer in a Russell Group University before taking redundancy when her department folded. A mix of preference, and carer responsibilities for which universities are still largely unsupportive, led her to work as a consultant with universities, charities, and industry.

Helen has never been, or wanted to be, employed in academia. She has been an independent researcher since 1999 and an independent scholar since 2011. She has worked with universities around the world since 2005, published widely on research ethics and research methods and hosts the International Creative Research Methods Conference.

While these independent research trajectories have been rewarding, the lack of an institutional affiliation raises significant barriers. Helen, was recently asked by a professor (let’s call him Jim) from outside the UK to apply for a visiting fellowship at his institution. The fellowship was about expanding creative approaches to research in Jim’s university. Jim approached Helen because he knew her work on creative research methods and thought she would be an ideal candidate. Helen would have loved to apply, but from past experience knew to check the small print. Sure enough, only researchers employed by other universities were eligible.

We could cite many other examples, but often it is a one-way conversation. As often as we’re told ‘no’, we are given no response at all. Those erroneously classed as ‘non-academic’ (because they are not employed by a university) frequently seem unworthy of any response whatsoever.

The innovators, campaigners, trailblazers and risk-takers that could transform their systems and practices do not always work as full-time academics.

Research funders, and many universities, only say ‘yes’ to working with people employed by other institutions. This enables institutions to retain their power at the expense of skilled professionals. But, it also disadvantages institutions, as in Jim’s example, because they are unable to hire the best people. The innovators, campaigners, trailblazers and risk-takers that could transform their systems and practices do not always work as full-time academics.

It’s not just those with academic experience and skills who are barred from sharing their skills and knowledge with research institutions. Those with extensive experience of doing research in the third sector, local government, and industry are also often unable to participate. Scholars from lower and middle-income countries, including Indigenous researchers, also face systemic inequalities that prevent them from participating.

A recent editorial in Science focused on the need for universities and other research institutions to adapt their processes to work with Indigenous researchers. This ‘requires addressing the well-documented institutional barriers that limit full participation and visibility of Indigenous worldviews’. We acknowledge the unique value of Indigenous knowledge and we applaud this approach. However, these calls further highlight the barriers and gatekeeping practices that institutions deploy to limit the full participation and visibility of all scholars working outside of the university system.

Universities are nominally open institutions, but for many they are closed

Institutions like universities hold political power, but they don’t always recognise that or take it seriously (p.150). Universities are nominally open institutions, but for many they are closed. A recent HEPI report into public perceptions of universities showed despite their recognised importance, a mere 18% of their sample had actually been to a university in the past year. Changing ingrained practices that exclude external contributions is difficult, but we can call it out in hope of change to come.

Some universities do offer opportunities, but it is always dependent on a good relationship with an individual staff member and when they move on, it changes. This ultimately puts pressure on that staff member to work around systemic institutional barriers, which can take a great deal of time and energy to overcome.

There are signs of change. In 2015, Helen was the first fully independent researcher to be conferred as a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, in recognition of her work. Petra has worked extensively advising universities and charities in and outside the UK on how to transform their research teaching, pastoral care, and supervision.

There are also a few research-active institutions that do welcome independent researchers. The National Centre for Research Methods is a shining example of universal inclusive practice, and to our certain knowledge has welcomed and supported independent and other marginalised researchers consistently for at least the last ten years.

The British Academy, through its small grants programme, offers a small amount of funding (maximum £10,000 over 2 years) that independent researchers can apply for, and some grants from the Wellcome Trust are available to community and creative projects. The European Commission (which Helen works with) and UK Government, Public Bodies, charities and NGOs (which Petra works with) also welcome input from highly skilled and externally recognised independent researchers.

Research happens in lots of places outside universities, and the culture in most of those places is to network widely. The insular approach taken by all research councils and some universities leads to extractive work and a missed opportunity for collective practice and knowledge exchange that should be at the heart of any meaningfully engaged university.

The content generated on this blog is for information purposes only. This Article gives the views and opinions of the authors and does not reflect the views and opinions of the Impact of Social Science blog (the blog), nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science. Please review our comments policy if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image credit: Dafinka on Shutterstock.