Valuing cultural research

A new report from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (Hidden Connections) provides powerful evidence of the importance of arts and humanities research and its contribution to the economy and society.

With the sub-title ‘Knowledge Exchange between the arts and humanities and the private, public and third sectors’, the report draws on a substantial body of data to demonstrate that arts and humanities research forms an important part of a complex eco-system of knowledge production, in which there is considerable interaction between the research community and businesses, public sector organisations and the charitable sector.

More than 20,000 academics were surveyed, generating a huge body of information, which has highlighted – among other things:
? The arts and humanities are highly connected, with 30% engaged with the private sector, and 66% involved in research which is of relevance to non-commercial external organisations
? Businesses interact with researchers in a variety of ways, with access to new technology being a relatively small part of the various transactions
? Arts and humanities research can play a particularly valuable role in providing access to soft knowledge and skills: specialist networks, problem-solving, and consultancy.

The report acknowledges that there is a small, but significant, amount of technology research which can be commercialised and is of clear economic value – but highlights the fact that much of the rest of all research – across STEM subjects, as well as across arts and humanities – provides value for business and society:
In general, this does not take the form of technology transfer through patents, licences and spin-outs. Distinctions between the Arts and Humanities and other disciplines based on this narrow perspective are, however, deeply misleading.

Although it is evident from the report that some academic disciplines (creative arts and media) are clearly more effective than others (languages) at pursuing external links and/or are more valued by external partners, a very clear picture emerges of a complex set of interactions between academia and business. There is plenty here to belie the myth that only STEM subjects generate economic or social value – and to help strengthen the case for a more enlightened approach to knowledge generation and exchange.

However – notwithstanding the strength of the evidence base gathered here – there is still a nagging doubt about what that “economic or social value” actually is. It’s all very well being able to point to the many interactions between, say, fine art research and the visual arts sector – but how is that added value to be defined? What is it that academic research provides which can be genuinely described as adding economic or social value?

There is a basic requirement to codify the different types of interaction, and to articulate their value in understandable and measurable terms. What is the value of ‘problem-solving’ or ‘role-playing’? How can activities like ‘networking’ and ‘advice’ be codified into tangible products or services? And, perhaps more fundamentally, how can we measure the value of culture in society?

Fortunately, the AHRC has already embarked on another piece of work to address the issue of ‘cultural value’ and there is every hope that some of the findings of that work might find their way into the next stage of this one. Dave O’Brien’s report for the DCMS was largely funded by the AHRC, and this makes an important contribution to the thinking about how cultural ‘value’ is articulated and captured. It is hoped that the next phase of this work might provide further insights which can be utilised by the wider cultural community.

Hidden Connections is, therefore, an important part of a growing body of evidence to support the case for arts and humanities teaching and research. But, as Geoffrey Crossick implied when introducing the report at the AHRC launch event, we need to address ourselves to a number of very specific issues around ‘measurement’ and ‘value’ if we wish the Treasury and others to respond to the more general case for culture.