Recent policy discourse suggests that arts and humanities research is seen as being less useful to society than other disciplines, notably in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The paper explores how this assumption’s construction has been built and whether it is based upon an unfair prejudice: we argue for a prima facie case to answer in assuming that arts and humanities research’s lower societal value. We identify a set of claims circulating in policy circles regarding science, technology, engineering and mathematics research and arts and humanities research’s differences. We find two groups: arts and humanities research is less useful than science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and arts and humanities research is merely differently useful. We argue that empirical analysis is necessary to disentangle which ones are true to assess whether policy-making is being based on rational and evidence-based claims. We argue that debates about public research value should recognise that humanities have different (but equally valid) kinds of societal value.
Abreu M, Grinevich, V, Hughes A, et al. (2009) Knowledge exchange between academics and the business, public and third sectors. Report, Cambridge: Centre for Business Research and UK-IRC. Available at: http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/pdf/AcademicSurveyReport.pdf (accessed 15 November 2011).
BateJ (2011) The Public Value of the Humanities, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
5.
BelfioreE (2002) Art as a means of alleviating social exclusion: Does it really work? A critique of instrumental cultural policies and social impact studies in the UK. International journal of cultural policy8: 91–106.
6.
BelfioreE (2015) ‘Impact’, ‘value’ and ‘bad economics’: Making sense of the problem of value in the arts and humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education,first published on April 22, 2014, doi: 10.1177/1474022214531503.
7.
Benneworth P (2011) What is the value of arts and humanities research? From irresoluble disagreements to boundary conditions for value statements. In: Paper presented at the Consortium of Higher Education Research (CHER) annual conference, what are the prospects for higher education in the 21st century? Ideas, research and policy’, Reykjavik, Iceland, 23–25 June.
8.
BenneworthP (2015) Where are arts and humanities scholars connections to publics through their research?Arts and Humanities in Higher Education14.
9.
Bensink J (2012) Scientific excellence and societal relevance/impact. In: Rapporteur’s presentation to Tripartite international symposium on research evaluation, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2 November.
10.
BermanE (2011) Creating the Market University: How Academic Science Became an Economic Engine, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
11.
BérubéM (2003) The utility of the arts and humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education2: 23–40.
12.
BigelowJ (1998) Valuing humanities research. In: Australian Academy of the Humanities (eds) Knowing Ourselves and Others: The Humanities in Australia into the 21st Century (Vol. 3) Reflective Essays, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, pp. 37–58.
13.
BozemanB (2002) Public-value failure: When efficient markets may not do. Public Administration Review62: 145–161.
14.
British Academy (2004) ‘That full complement of riches’: The contributions of the arts, humanities and social sciences to the nation’s wealth. Report, UK: The British Academy. Available at: http://www.britac.ac.uk/templates/asset-relay.cfm?frmAssetFileID=6386 (accessed 20 November 2011).
British Academy (2010) Past Present and Future. The Public Value of the Humanities and Social Sciences. UK: The British Academy. Available at: http://www.britac.ac.uk/news/bulletin/BAPPF.pdf (accessed 11 September 2013).
17.
Bush V (1945) Science: The Endless Frontier. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm (accessed 27 October 2011).
18.
CassityEAngI (2006) Humanities-industry partnerships and the ‘Knowledge society’: The Australian experience. Minerva44: 47–63.
Crossick G (2006) Knowledge Transfer Without Widgets: The Challenge of the Creative Economy. Lecture to the Royal Society of Arts, Leeds, 31 May 2006. Available at: http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/warden/creative-economy.pdf (accessed 20 November 2011).
EdgarAPattisonS (2006) Need humanities be so useless? Justifying the place and role of humanities as a critical resource for performance and practice. Medical humanities32: 92–98.
24.
EsmeijerA (1999) Sluiswachters in de wetenschapscommunicatie. Selectieprocessen bij het populariseren van (alfa) onderzoek, Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
25.
EtzkowitzHWebsterAGebhardtC (2000) The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research policy29: 313–330.
26.
European Commission (2011) Cultural statistics. Eurostat pocketbooks. Report, Luxembourg: European Commission.
27.
GascoigneTMetcalfeJ (2005) Commercialisation of Research Activities in the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences in Australia, CHASS Occasional Papers N 1. Australia: Council for Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences.
28.
GibbonsMLimogesCNowotnyH (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage.
29.
GulbrandsenMAanstadS (2015) How can innovation be a useful concept for arts and humanities research?Arts and Humanities in Higher Education14.
30.
GulbrandsenMKyvikS (2010) Are the concepts basic research, applied research and experimental development still useful? An empirical investigation among Norwegian academics. Science and Public Policy37: 343–353.
31.
HazelkornE (2015) Making an impact: New directions for arts and humanities research?Arts and Humanities in Higher Education14.
32.
HowardD (2011) Architectural history in academia and the wider community. In: BateJ (ed) The public value of the humanities, London: Bloomsbury Academic, pp. 76–86.
33.
HughesAKitsonM (2012) Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: New evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Cambridge Journal of Economics36: 723–750.
34.
Hughes A, Kitson M, Probert J, et al. (2011) Hidden connections: Knowledge exchange between the arts and humanities and the private, public and third sectors. Report, UK: Arts and Humanities Research Council. Available at: http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-and-Events/Publications/Documents/Hidden-Connections.pdf (accessed 27 October 2011).
35.
KenneyM (1986) Biotechnology: The University Industrial Complex, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36.
KickertW (1997) Public governance in the Netherlands: An alternative to Anglo-American ‘managerialism’. Public administration75: 731–752.
37.
KlineSRosenbergN (1986) An overview of innovation. In: LandauRRosenbergN (eds) The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, pp. 275–305.
38.
Lopez CerezoJAVerdaderoC (2003) Introduction: Science, technology and society studies – from the European and American north to the Latin American south. Technology in Society25: 153–170.
39.
MartinB (2011) The research excellence framework and the ‘impact agenda’: Are we creating a Frankenstein monster?Research Evaluation20: 247–254.
40.
Molas-Gallart (2015) Research evaluation and the assessment of public value. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education14(1): 111–126.
41.
NussbaumMC (2012) Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities, New Jersey, CT: Princeton University Press.
42.
O’ConnorJ (2011) Las industrias creativas y culturales: Una historia crítica. Ekonomiaz78: 24–47.
43.
Olmos-PeñuelaJBenneworthPCastro-MartínezE (2013a) Are ‘STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus’?: Challenging disciplinary stereotypes of research’s social value. Science and Public Policy. Epub ahead of print 3 October 2013. DOI:10.1093/scipol/sct071.
44.
Olmos-Peñuela J, Castro-Martínez E and Fernández-Esquinas M (2014) Differences between scientific fields in social dissemination practices: an empirical study of the CSIC. Revista Española de Documentación Científica 37(2): forthcoming.
45.
Olmos-PeñuelaJMolas-GallartJCastro-MartínezE (2013b) Informal collaborations between social sciences and humanities researchers and non-academic partners. Science and Public Policy. Epub ahead of print 17 October 2013. DOI:10.1093/scipol/sct075.
46.
O’NeillO (2011) Foreword. In: BateJ (ed) The Public Value of the Humanities, London: Bloomsbury Academic, pp. v–viii.
47.
PollmannT (1999) De letteren als wetenschappen: een inleiding, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
48.
Represa-SánchezDCastro-MartínezEFernández de LucioI (2005) Encouraging protection of public research results in Spain. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights10: 382–388.
49.
ShapinS (2012) The Ivory Tower: The history of a figure of speech and its cultural uses. British Journal for the History of Science45: 1–27.
SokalA (2000) Revelation: A physicist experiments with cultural studies. In: FrancaLingua (ed) The Sokal Hoax: The Sham that Shook the Academy, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 49–53.
52.
Spaapen J, van Drooge L, Propp T, et al. (2011) Social impact assessment methods for research and funding instruments through the study of productive interactions between science and society. SIAMPI final report, The Netherlands. Available at: http://www.siampi.eu/Content/SIAMPI_Final%20report.pdf (accessed 25 April 2014).
53.
StokesD (1997) Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
54.
SzreterS (2011) History and public policy. In: BateJ (ed) The Public Value of the Humanities, London: Spubna, pp. 219–231.
55.
ToulminV (2011) This is a local film: The cultural and social impact of Mitchell and Kenyon film collection. In: BateJ (ed) The Public Value of the Humanities, London: Bloomsbury Academic, pp. 87–102.
56.
ZomerABenneworthP (2011) The rise of the university’s third mission. In: EndersJde BoerHFWesterheijdenDF (eds) Reform of Higher Education in Europe, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. 81–101.
