Public accountability ‘leading motivation for evaluating research impact’ globally
Understanding and demonstrating the societal impact of research has become a strategic priority for universities and research institutions worldwide, according to a new global survey of research office staff and researchers.
Research Professional News has released findings from its Research Offices of the Future 2025 survey, which gathered responses from more than 1,100 research office professionals and 1,400 researchers across multiple regions. The survey examines how institutions are evaluating societal impact, which research outputs are prioritised as evidence, and the challenges of measuring real-world influence at scale.
The results highlight significant regional variation in the drivers behind societal impact evaluation, alongside a continued global reliance on traditional academic publications as primary indicators of impact. Across regions, policy citations and media mentions emerged as the most highly valued proxy measures for demonstrating broader societal influence.
Public accountability was identified by research office staff as the leading motivation for evaluating societal impact overall, cited by 67% of respondents. This was followed by funding requirements (53%) and strategic differentiation (50%). Respondents in the UK and Australia/New Zealand broadly mirrored this global pattern.
In Europe, however, funding requirements were the dominant driver, with 61% of respondents identifying this as their primary reason for impact evaluation. Strategic differentiation was the leading motivation in the Middle East, cited by 67% of respondents, and also overtook funding requirements as the second most common driver in North America, Asia, and Africa.
The findings suggest that institutions are using societal impact evaluation to meet different strategic, financial, and accountability objectives depending on regional context. A recent report from the Institute for Scientific Information further explores how data and metrics can be tailored to support these varying evaluation goals.