Potential idea for discussion: New ways others are measuring impact

[MarcelaCespedes]

While the scale of the project below is perhaps beyond the scope of ACEMS, it's fantastic to know that there are other methods for measuring impact and could help in the discussion and generate ideas for the upcoming presentation.

Alternative approach to measuring impact

This Nature article illustrates very clever ideas on how the team at Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) have developed and are refining the Research Quality Plus (RQ+) index to measure the impact of science and research projects that should be supported.

Unlike the traditional method to measure research impact (such as publications/ citations/ etc), to quote the authors of the article

"The tool recognizes that scientific merit is necessary, but not sufficient. It acknowledges the crucial role of stakeholders and users in determining whether research is salient and legitimate. It focuses attention on how well scientists position their research for use, given the mounting understanding that uptake and influence begins during the research process, not only afterwards."

As described in the article; one of the motivating examples includes the Harrassmap tool based in Cairo which led to the identification of hotspots where sexual harassment occurs. This in turn led to an organisation to implement policy at one of these hotspots to combat sexual harassment, and to quote the article, it was 'the first of its kind in the Middle East'. While such a project did not result in an overwhelming and fast succession of publications, and so may not be deemed high impact by the norms of academia, this project helped deliver informed policy and decision making and was used to identify and improve challenges in society.

[jesse-jesse]

This is a great example @MarcelaCespedes.