The need to support innovative cross-government working is clear, and was highlighted at the recent Civil Service World Collaboration Conference in Leeds. Yet the higher education sector was only mentioned in passing. Universities were largely framed as spaces for long-term reflection and evaluation, rather than active partners in policy design and delivery – despite the wealth of knowledge available in universities and growing investment in research and innovation to tackle societal challenges (UK Research and Innovation will invest £8.8bn in 2025-26).
When policymakers need expertise, where do they turn? In a recent CSW article, Sian Jones of the National Audit Office argued that consultancy engagements should leave a legacy of skills, not just deliverables, and that lessons must be shared across government to avoid “paying twice for the same advice.” This cultural shift towards embedded learning is precisely where universities can add significant value. Yet the NAO’s report on consultancy use made no mention of the UK’s research and innovation system, and by extension its 140+ universities, as an integral part of the evidence mix.
Speakers at the CSW Collaboration Conference stressed that effective partnerships require time, trust, and sustained effort. Through their durability and commitment to long-term enquiry, this is what universities are uniquely positioned to provide via their role as civic anchors, and as Mariana Mazzucato has argued, their provision of the sort of embedded expertise that large consultancies struggle to deliver.
As a recent Nature comment piece notes, “academic consulting work, one of the most direct and scalable means by which academics can shape industry, government and civil society, remains underdeveloped”. This is accompanied with a plea for universities to focus on associated policies, processes and incentive structures. This is not a case of downplaying what consultancies can offer, rather it is a renewed call for the higher education sector to think about how it can support and deliver more of the government’s research and evaluation needs. We cannot ignore the fact that structural barriers remain on both sides, however recent investments such as the Economic and Social Research Council-funded Evidence Exchange initiative have been designed with these obstacles in mind.
At the Universities Policy Engagement Network, our work follows three tenets:
- Firstly, the need to make the most of public investment in both new research and the existing knowledge base. As Ian Chapman, UKRI’s chief executive, recently outlined: “The UK’s biggest, perhaps only, differentiating asset from other major economies is the quality of our research and innovation system… a somewhat latent, undervalued and underappreciated asset… our nation’s future depends on us doing more, on sweating our research assets to their maximum.”
- Secondly, universities have a unique role in supporting policymakers to identify the ‘right’ evidence and expertise, diversify sources, and adopt a more nuanced view of what counts as good or ‘good enough’ evidence.
- Thirdly, universities exist to provide public benefit. This should be viewed in terms of a commitment to shared learning, as well as a drive towards innovation – of products, services and approaches. This offer encompasses a different and complementary kind of public value from those offered by traditional consultancies and think tanks.
UPEN’s value lies in its ability to communicate evidence needs across its network of university knowledge mobilisers; mapping the evidence landscape, and working with civil servants to identify and convene expertise. A current example is areas of research interest, where UPEN has worked closely, through co-delivered workshops with central, regional and local government stakeholders. Within such an enabling structure, different forms of relationship between policymakers and the research base can co-exist. Whilst there is still important work to be done to raise awareness among policy professionals, the HE sector appears hopeful that deeper engagement with university research will be increasingly central to the UK government missions programme.
At present there is a lack of individual and institutional capacity for delivering the rapid but robust evidence required by government. Addressing this requires a model of sustained collaboration that strengthens the evidence ecosystem, and creates learning loops that one-off consultancy projects rarely replicate. UPEN functions as a convener and intermediary, working alongside policymakers over the long term. While consultancies invariably deliver discrete outputs, UPEN is an active embodiment of UKRI’s commitment to build capability, improve evidence literacy, and provide the resource for independent scrutiny; ‘public goods’ that private consultancies are not structurally incentivised to deliver.
The question is not whether academics should replace consultants, but rather how government can engage with the research base in different ways, and how this informs developments within the R&D system. Rapid evidence synthesis, systems mapping, and evaluation frameworks can be delivered by universities as long as procurement models reward capability-building and a more open sharing of lessons learned. Embedded fellowships, two-way secondments, and evidence translation units can ensure that academic expertise is integrated into policy processes, rather than bolted on as an afterthought. If government wants best value, it must invest in partnerships that leave a legacy of skills, strengthen institutional memory, and embed learning across departments. Universities are ready to play that role. The challenge is to re-assert their centrality within the evidence ecosystem so that public investment in research and innovation delivers not just research outputs, but long-term capability for tackling the UK’s most complex and intractable policy problems.
Chris Hewson is head of policy engagement at University of Huddersfield. Sarah Chaytor is director of research strategy & policy at University College London. Andrew Brown is professor of Economics and Political Economy at University of Leeds. They are co-chairs of the Universities Policy Engagement Network