We argue for a broader understanding and subsequent assessment of knowledge exchange and collaboration. We also call for more attention to relative opportunities when determining clustering.
In our response regarding REF, we request transparency and clarity in methods and approach, and express concerns about administrative burden and UoA / HESA mapping
Our response highlights the need to recognise and accommodate interdisciplinarity, and need for continuity from REF 2014.
Our submission to the Education Committee states the importance of international collaboration in education, and highlights the importance of EU staff and students to geographical research in the UK.
A call for evidence on the REF as part of Lord Stern's independent review. Our response stresses that current metrics, and definitions of output and impact, do not adequately assess research, particularly in interdisciplinary contexts.
Our response welcomes voluntary frameworks, and advocates for greater recognition of the diversity of data types and research practices.
Our response to the consultation on topics for the 2021 Census in England and Wales explains how census data is used by geographers, and the importance of consistency in census definitions.
Our response argues for investment in innovation, and both disciplinary and interdisciplinary research. We also express strong support for dual funding via Funding Councils and Research Councils.
Our response evaluates the existing network, and advocates for fieldwork and interdisciplinarity in future developments. We also highlight a lack of flexibility in 1+3 studentships.
Our invited response encourages the ESRC to support interdisciplinary and multi-scalar research, and invest in a spatial (geographical) focus.
Our response reiterates the position that metrics cannot adequately capture originality, significance and rigour of academic outputs
A consultation on the proposed merged of BAS and NOC. Our response says there is insufficient evidence to support merging the centres
In evidence submitted to the Commons Science and Technology Committee, we outline how geographers use census data, and its importance to social science research and government decision-making.
Our response to the HEFCE consultation on REF2014 criteria and methods calls for greater consistency across main panel criteria and methods, and highlights omissions in descriptors for geography.
Our written response to the Science and Technology Committee's inquiry into spending review argued for greater recognition and support for the role of social sciences, arts and humanities in research.
Our response to HEFCE's consultation on proposed changes allocation methods for the research degree programme supervision fund welcomes increased funding and encourages the linkage of funding with research quality.
Our response to ESRC proposals for managing research funding demand calls for a system based on individual researchers rather than institutional quotas or penalties.
Our response to the European Commission Green Paper on EU research funding advocates for embedding geographical approaches in future research goals, and the simplification of funding and performance measures
We endorse the dual support approach to funding, and argue for the ringfenced AR funding consistent with geography's accepted part-STEM status.
Our response argues for an international and multiscalar focus in the new strategic priorities.
Our response welcomes the proposed release of certain OS datasets, and argues for sustained long-term funding for OS and MasterMap.
Our response strongly states that geography should be understood as a part-STEM subject, and defends the contribution of geography to scientific research and value creation
We convey community comments, and emphasise that geography must be recognised and assessed as a single unit, but in a way that accounts for the nature of the discipline
Our response offers examples of how the Society's work can support interaction between policymakers and researchers, and suggests approaches that can enable interdisciplinary cooperation.
Our response to the initial DIUS proposals encourages greater engagement from policymakers, publics and researchers, which can be facilitated by learned societies. It also advocates for greater recognition of the breadth of 'science', the role of public engagement, and the value of policy-relevant research.
Our response emphasises the need to support hydrology/water science, responsive mode research and international collaboration. It also requests clarity around how "environmental" themes will be integrated in projects.
Our response summarises and highlights community views on the proposals for REF, conveying support for dual funding, non-STEM mode of assessment, and discipline-based peer-review. This response refers to what ultimately became REF2014.
Our response stresses the importance to the social sciences of investment and development towards data collection, management and analysis facilities.
Our response calls for AHRC recognition of geography in interdisciplinary or non-humanities units, and evaluates how several funding proposals might affect geography researchers
Our response evaluates the 1+3 model in general, and highlights inflexible quota allocations and limited options for quantitative training as discipline-specific issues.
Our response to this Department for Education and Skills (now-DfE) consultation evaluates the meaning and role of metrics in RAE2008 assessments
By placing a booking, you are permitting us to store and use your (and any other attendees) details in order to fulfil the booking.
We will not use your details for marketing purposes without your explicit consent.
You must be a member holding a valid Society membership to view the content you are trying to access. Please login to continue.
Join us today, Society membership is open to anyone with a passion for geography
Cookies on the RGS website