The Ethics of Impact

Impact may have been designed as part of the research project. However, there could be additional activities (e.g. public engagement) in addition to the research work or serendipitous impact, which may not have been considered at the outset of the research project. The same principles that govern our research should also govern the impact that results from it, namely:

• Respect for the rights, safety and well-being of all human participants and animals
• Respect for other cultures, values, traditions and the environment around us
• Honesty, integrity and professionalism at all times

Further information on Research Ethics is available online at and training sessions normally run on a biannual basis.

Ask yourself, why is the research being conducted? Who will benefit and how? Are there positive impacts as well as negative impacts to the research?

To consider the ethics of the impact of research then we should remind ourselves of Research England's definition of impact (used by the REF): 'An effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life beyond academia.' This can include the reduction or prevention of harm, risk, cost or other negative effects. . 

There is also the UKRI's more general definition: 'The demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy'.

Good and worthwhile impact need not necessarily be for a REF Impact Case Study. Impact existed before the REF and is not unique to the UK.

Impact could even be a double-edged sword that you might not be in full control of. The research could lead to both positive and negative impacts. Would the positive impacts outweigh the negative impacts in the long run? There is an interesting post on the LSE blog.

Impact Case Studies for the REF 2021 are available on the online database. The submitted case study can include confidential information that can be redacted. Any beneficiaries should not subsequently be penalised if sensitive information is released because of the REF. Ideally, we need to build long-term relationships with these beneficiaries for their benefit as well as that of AU. Involve stakeholders and partners in the process if possible and make them feel valued.

Remember, if impact activities are in addition, rather than being integrated into your research plan, then you may need separate ethical approval.

In May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and subsequent Data Protection Act (2018) gave data subjects more control over their personal data, which they have a right to access, amend or erase at any time. AU must have a valid reason for collecting the data and will keep any (hardcopy or electronic) data securely. Data must be deleted after the specified retention period. There are severe penalties for not adhering to these regulations. See our Information Compliance pages for further information.

In terms of the REF, personal data can include testimonial letters, surveys and feedback questionnaire, recordings and transcripts of interviews.  Although the legal basis for collecting data as part of the research project would probably be categorised as ‘a task in the public interest’, it is unlikely that gathering data to evaluate or corroborate impact would not actually be research itself. The legal basis would therefore have to primarily be based on their ‘consent’. Anyone who provides information that contains personal data should be directed to the Privacy Notice for Public Engagement Survey Respondents and for Providers of Testimonials. 

The maximum length of time to retain such data would be one REF cycle plus one year (i.e. eight years), ideally on the secure PURE system. Otherwise, any electronic records would have to be password protected and any hardcopies kept in a locked drawer in a locked room. In the UK, a data subject must be at least thirteen years old to give consent on how their personal data is used. Thus, for any outreach / school liaison / widening participation events, we could only collect this data from Year 9 students and older. For any children younger than this, any data collected must be completely anonymised and consent obtained from a parent / guardian, but teachers could be approached for testimonials.

If you intend to conduct interviews to evaluate or corroborate impact then you need to seek the interviewee’s consent. Further information is available on the Fast Track website. Again, GDPR issues apply to any recordings or transcripts from interviews.

Impact Case Studies for the REF 2021 are available online. Some of the submitted case studies can include confidential information that can be redacted. Personal data should not be collected if it is not relevant.

The National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE) is recognised by the HE sector as the leading expert in this area. They discuss key social and ethical issues that should be considered when planning public engagement activities.

Public engagement can cover a multitude of activities that have the potential to generate research impact, for example knowledge transfer and / or consultancy, outreach, school liaison and widening participation. Please see these AU pages for further information on these activities and contact details of staff who have expertise of working in these areas.

If public meetings and invited external speakers are to be used as a pathway to impact then the Prevent Duties should be considered carefully.