You are in: Submissions > Select institution > University of Bath > UOA 40 - Social Work and Social Policy & Administration > RA5a

University of Bath

UOA 40 - Social Work and Social Policy & Administration

RA5a: Research environment and esteem

1.      RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT: INTRODUCTION 

[UoA40 Panel Criteria Paras 19-23]

The University of Bath is an internationally-recognised centre for social policy research, with a strong focus on policy and practice. 

The Department of Social and Policy Sciences (DSPS) is the hub of a network of social policy research which also involves colleagues in Economics, Psychology and the School for Health. We also collaborate with research groups across the University, on wider inter-disciplinary problems.  Beyond this, we engage with a wide variety of public, voluntary and private sector partners, in processes of knowledge exchange and development. 

Our research engages with leading current policy initiatives and debates. It ranges across the local, national, European and global levels and involves us in policy advice to key stakeholders at all these levels. It examines policy goals and outcomes by reference to overlapping but contested concepts such as wellbeing, poverty and social exclusion and it critically questions the boundaries and paradigms of social policy studies. This research infuses our undergraduate and postgraduate teaching.   

We host three major journals. Staff advise the UN, WHO, World Bank, the EU institutions and numerous Government departments. They are active in reviews of research, through ESRC and other UK funding bodies and also internationally. Ten have been honoured by major awards and prizes.   

This submission comprises 23.70 Category A staff. The University has made a substantial investment in research leadership across this area during the present RAE period, involving additional Chairs and Readerships through external appointment (Bauld, Butler, Gilmore, Griffin, Judge, Kellehear, Standing, Walter), as well as internal promotions.  

The headcount number of research students rose from 21.30 FTE in 2000/1 to 31.60 FTE in 2006/7. Research studentships averaged seven a year, while doctoral degrees awarded averaged almost four: corresponding figures for the previous RAE period were 5.8 and 2.4.  

Total external research income was £4.4 million, compared with £1.03 million in our RAE 2001 submission. In rank order, the major sources were research council (almost £2 million), charities (£1.1 million), UK government (over £800k) and EU (over £200k). The future is bright: for research beyond the present RAE period, we have already secured funding in excess of £3.5 million (section 6 below).

2.      RESEARCH GROUPINGS 

[UoA40 Panel Criteria Para 24a]

Our research is organised at three levels.

1)      We address major debates about national policy (in the UK and elsewhere) in four substantive areas: Work and Welfare; Health and Social Care; Childhood and Youth; Death and Dying. In each case we have been able to draw on a range of disciplinary perspectives to develop contributions to theory and methodology but also to illuminate policy debate and feed into practice [Groupings A-D]. 

2)      We engage with scientific and policy debates at European and global levels, their implications for national policy and the distinctive theoretical and methodological problems that they pose [Grouping E]. 

3)      While both the preceding levels of our research involve conceptual and methodological innovation, a further set of work specifically addresses meta-level questions of social policy analysis and design [Grouping F].

These research groupings are open and flexible, with some staff involved in more than one, maximising scope for synergy and cross-fertilisation. 

A.         Work and Welfare 

Collard, Griffin, Harkness, Millar, Rose, Wainwright

Our research contributes to two major policy debates in regards to work and welfare.  First, the present Government has invested heavily in policies of welfare to work, as a vehicle for addressing poverty and social exclusion, and for reinforcing active citizenship.  Our research evaluates the effectiveness of such policies for different target groups and the trade-offs involved, notably between domestic caring and employment. Second, there is a renewed debate around the quality of work and its contribution to wellbeing.   

Millar has a long-standing record of research into poverty, low pay, social security and social exclusion.  Recently she has been exploring the goals, implementation and outcomes of the ‘work as welfare’ policy agenda. This has included evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents, analysis of low pay, poverty and household income, and cross-national comparison of welfare to work policy [Millar:1-3].* She is currently examining wellbeing in work and employment sustainability for lone-mother families, using innovative longitudinal qualitative methods [Millar:4]. Her work is complemented by the research of Harkness [1-4], using advanced econometric techniques to analyse the impact of welfare to work for lone parents, gender equality in the labour market and the implications for child poverty. 

Policies of ‘welfare to work’ are intended to reinforce a strong work ethic. They therefore invite research into work orientations, in particular as female employment rises and traditional notions of the ‘male breadwinner’ are put in question. Griffin [1-2] investigates the resilience of this self-image among employed and unemployed alike. Rose [2-4] is likewise concerned with work orientation, but in the context of stress, quality of work and wellbeing. His research complements Wainwright’s studies of work stress [Wainwright:1,2] and also confronts critically some of the popular wisdom about the emerging ‘knowledge economy’ [Rose: 3]. Collard [3] deals with extrinsic satisfactions in the form of occupational welfare.  

B.         Health and Social Care

Bauld, Brown, Day, Gilmore, Gould, Judge, Kellehear, Kuhlmann, Templeton, Velleman

Our research contributes to three major policy debates around health and social care: the persistence of health inequalities; the growing policy concern with healthy lifestyles and communities; and the reorganisation and ‘modernisation’ of health and social care.  

Health inequalities are a central concern of health policy in the developed world. Judge’s ESRC research demonstrated the strong links between episodes of poverty and poor health but also the complex methodological and measurement problems involved [Judge:1, 2]. This led to a report on EU health inequalities under the UK Presidency which, as well as feeding into EU policy initiatives, is being used by WHO Europe to consult on the social determinants of health [Judge:4].

Health inequalities are not a simple reflection of poverty. Lifestyle is also crucial. We have a major body of work concerned with addiction in relation to smoking, drugs and alcohol and related harm-reduction policies. Working with Judge, Bauld [2,3] led the national evaluation of smoking cessation services in England, funded by the DoH, which has had a major influence within the international tobacco control community. Gilmore’s work [1-4] has focussed primarily on tobacco consumption in the former Soviet Union: more particularly, the role of the international tobacco companies and the public health consequences of privatisation. Templeton [1-4] and Velleman [1-4] research the resilience of the families of those with drug and alcohol problems, nationally and cross-culturally. 

Communities shape lifestyles and underpin family resilience. Judge’s evaluation of Health Action Zones [Judge:3; Bauld:1,4] has fed into a wide range of public health and regeneration initiatives. Kellehear’s work on palliative care (section D below) also carries lessons for public health and resilient communities. 

Finally, a recurring policy theme has been the reorganisation, governance and ‘modernisation’ of health and social care. Day [2-4] has continued her collaboration with Rudolf Klein, concerned with health service governance and organisation, an area to which Powell [Category B] also contributed. Brown [1] offers one of the few controlled studies of the outcomes of health and social care integration; while Gould’s work [1-4] with NICE and SCIE has pioneered the development of integrated evidence-based guidelines for health and social care. Kuhlmann’s recent book [3] deals with health care modernisation and governance, elaborated in relation to gender hierarchies, professional trustworthiness and consumer choice [Kuhlmann: 1-2, 4].       

C.         Childhood and Youth

Butler, Griffin, Ridge, Rodham

Children and young people have been at the centre of three major policy debates: the commitment to reduce child poverty; recognition that young people must be given ‘voice’; and concern that many young people are at risk. Our research contributes to the knowledge base in all three.

Ridge [1-4] has pioneered in-depth child-centred interviews to explore their perceptions of life in poverty and on child support, and the way children help sustain work and care in lone-mother families. Butler [2,4] explores children’s experience of divorce and their role in the management of daily family life. These studies contribute child-centred measures of wellbeing, important both nationally and (through UNICEF and other human rights institutions) internationally. 

Young people develop their identities in part by reference to consumption and style. Griffin’s research [3,4] links our understanding of young people’s orientation to consumption to how they acquire their understanding of social class: and also to processes of social exclusion.  Her research as a social psychologist connects with that of Ridge, in employing an innovative participant-centred methodology, and illustrates the inter-disciplinary synergies from which our research benefits.  

Rodham’s work [1-4] on self-harm among young people likewise treats young people as authors of their own biographies. Other aspects of risk are addressed in Butler’s work on the incidence of severe physical abuse, the only UK longitudinal study of its kind [Butler:1]. Risks to young people were also the focus of Phoenix’s [Category B] work on prostitution.  

D.        Death and Dying    

Howarth, Kellehear, Walter

Death and burial were major social policy issues in the 19th Century.  In recent years there has been renewed public debate around dying and bereavement, disposal and commemoration. Our research addresses these concerns, feeding into palliative care programmes and into a variety of practitioner networks, including the UK funeral directors and Cruse. It is accompanied by three major volumes that establish us as the leading UK centre for such research. Kellehear [4] has written the first comprehensive social history of dying. Howarth [2] is concerned with changes in attitudes to death, dying and loss: she also edited the Encyclopaedia of Death and Dying (Routledge, 2001).   

Kellehear [1-3] argues for community-based programmes to respond to death and loss and, beyond this, for ‘compassionate cities’, a development of the WHO healthy cities movement. This has helped shape palliative care policy, particularly in Australia.  Howarth [3] has argued for similar social policy responses to suicide-at-risk youth. Walter [2] examines social practices and supports in palliative and bereavement care. 

There is renewed concern about the adequacy of existing practices, policies and legislation for the disposal of human remains; and new notions of respect and dignity in managing death [Walter:3,4]. Walter [1] and Howarth [1,4] examine the negotiation of grief and bereavement and new kinds of memorialisation, locating these changes within broader cultural ground. One of their post-doctoral students has won a fellowship from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science to extend these investigations to Japan.   

E.   Globalisation, Wellbeing and Multi-Level Governance 

Choi, Collard, Cressey, Feldmann, Gough, Jones, Lawson, Room, Standing

Much of the research presented above uses cross-national comparisons to illuminate national policy debates within the UK and elsewhere. However, some of our research engages directly with scientific and policy debates at European and global levels, their implications for national policy and the distinctive theoretical and methodological problems that they pose. 

We investigate contemporary trajectories of national social policy development in response to liberal globalisation. Within the advanced western economies, Feldmann [1-4] evaluates the significance of statutory minimum wages, employment protection and industrial relations regimes for economic performance. Lawson’s work [1-4] deals with the diverse ‘transition’ trajectories of the erstwhile Communist countries, reflecting institutional path dependencies as well as political choices.  

Gough [2] provides an inter-disciplinary account of welfare regimes and trajectories across the developing world, with particular reference to Asia. Choi [1], formerly his doctoral student, examines social protection in the newly industrialised countries of East Asia. Collard [1,2] examines the inter-generational contract as a key dimension of social cohesion and equity within developing, as well as developed countries. This work is linked to our research on wellbeing in developing countries, under the auspices of the WeD Research Group (section 3.1 below), with Gough [3,4] and Collard [4] leading the theoretical element. Standing’s arrival here reinforces this research: through his work at ILO, Standing [1-4] has already done much to shape international policy debate, in terms of basic income security and decent work. During 2007 he has been lead author for the UN 2007 Report on the World’s Social Situation.  

Finally, we investigate multi-level social governance. Jones [1-3] examines the role of civil society in the UK and Italy. Cressey and Room evaluate the new instruments of social policy governance that are emerging at European level. Cressey [1-4] is concerned with European social dialogue, industrial relations systems and policies for the ‘learning organisation’: his association with the European Foundation, CEDEFOP and European trade union networks is important for our international knowledge transfer. Room [1] examines critically the policy-benchmarking of the Lisbon process and its drive for a European ‘knowledge economy’ [Room:3]: research funded under FP5 and involving close collaboration with Eurostat, OECD and national statistical offices.

F.         Policy Analysis and Design 

Breakwell, Brown, Butler, Cullis, Gould, Room, Wainwright

While much of the research reported above involves conceptual and methodological innovation, some of our work specifically seeks to develop tools for the analysis, design and presentation of policies. This is strongly inter-disciplinary, drawing on contributions from social psychology, sociology, economics, social policy and social work. 

Breakwell [1,4], a social psychologist, examines the ‘social representations’ and ‘mental models’ through which people views hazards. These are in some degree malleable, as policy-makers seek to re-shape popular perceptions of risk [Breakwell:2,3]. Butler [3] likewise researches the signals that are communicated to voters and citizens through the media in particular, in relation to social hazards and policy scandals. His book has spawned interest in the effects of ‘iconic/signal’ events in the shaping of public policy.  

Cullis works within the neo-classical economics paradigm, but develops it in novel ways. Social policy itself shapes individual preferences; public choice tools can support an extensive social role for governments; they can also reinforce collective obligations on the part of social policy consumers, providers and voters [Cullis: 1-2]. Like Breakwell and Butler, Cullis [3,4] draws important inferences for policy design and policy signals. His attention is on targets as an instrument of public policy and the signals these send to both voters and service providers. He offers alternative expenditure rules that are rooted in his more subtle account of agents and institutional contexts.  

The signals and guidelines that policy makers should deploy with service providers, if policies are to be effective and are not to set up countervailing dynamics, are also the concern of Gould and Brown. Working with SCIE and NICE, Gould [2,3] has produced evidence-based guidelines for practice in relation to both dementia and the parenting of children with conduct disorders. Brown [3,4], however, examines how guidelines for good practice in social services can also develop out of processes of innovation and critical reflection, involving researcher and practitioner, policy maker and service user. Even so, to engage service users always risks technocratic domination of the consumer: this is well demonstrated by Wainwright’s [3] critical appraisal of ‘conjoint analysis’ for participatory decision-making in health care.

Finally, Room [4] is developing an analytical approach to the dynamic interactions between social agents, institutional settings and policy interventions that draws on qualitative system dynamics, complexity science and neo-institutionalism. 

3.      RESEARCH ORGANISATION AND MANAGEMENT 

[Uoa40 Panel Criteria Para 24d-f]

3.1.   Organisation

The University ensures strategic coordination of research through research committees at University, Faculty and Departmental levels, working to the PVC Research.  

Ethical governance of our research is secured through Departmental and Faculty research ethics committees. With much of our work concerned with such sensitive areas as young people, vulnerable adults and those facing death and bereavement, ethical concerns are prominent at each point in the research process, from inception to dissemination.  

CASP (Centre for the Analysis of Social Policy), founded in 1982, is the principal hub for social policy research in the University. Millar has been director since 1997, in succession to Rudolf Klein. It involves close collaboration between DSPS, the School for Health, the Department of Economics and International Development and the Department of Psychology. It hosts the journal Work, Employment and Society. It has a ‘Framework’ agreement for research with DWP.

CASP oversees the various research groupings presented in Section 2. It works with CDAS (Centre for Death and Society) in research on Death and Dying (section 2.D above); and with the ERI (European Research Institute) in our international social policy research (section 2.E). 

CDAS was established in 2005 and is directed by Howarth. It has been central to the rapidly growing sociological interest in death and dying, in the UK and internationally, involving both scholarly work and innovative practice. CDAS hosts the journal Mortality.  

The ERI, founded in 1994, is directed from the Department of Social and Policy Sciences but brings together European social science research across the Faculty and is thus strongly inter-disciplinary. It has been recognised as a Centre of Excellence under the Jean Monnet Programme since 1997, with three Jean Monnet Chairs in European Integration. It hosts the Journal of European Social Policy.

Also important during this assessment period has been the WeD (Wellbeing in Developing Countries) Research Programme, a collaboration between Social Policy and Development Studies. This involves research into needs, resources, subjective quality of life, and livelihoods. Gough is Deputy Director.  It is funded by the ESRC (£3.25m for 2002-7). 

Formal structures are important, but not sufficient to ensure a creative research environment, responsive to new policy initiatives and new lines of curiosity-driven enquiry.  Significantly, therefore, each of the above spawns new clusters of research activity. In the ERI, for example, academics and research students cooperate in clusters on EU multi-level governance; work and wellbeing; markets and institutions. CASP holds workshops to discuss research in progress and incubate new research initiatives. CDAS has promoted a regular seminar on ‘sensitive research issues’ which, starting from research into death and bereavement, now infuses a wider range of Social Policy research among both research students and academics. Beyond these, DSPS has an extensive programme of research seminars, with internal and external speakers, which attract the whole range of academics involved in this submission.  

The Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences organises seminars aimed at promoting cross-Departmental research collaboration. These contribute to a research environment with competing paradigms and creative fusion of new ideas.

3.2.   Support for Research

The University’s Research Support Unit (RSU) provides support and guidance for academic staff in applying for external research funding and in the financial administration of projects. 

University Research and Innovation Services (RIS) promotes innovation, enterprise and entrepreneurship, through collaborative strategic partnerships with the public and private sectors. Such partnerships are not common outside science and engineering. Nevertheless, with RIS support, Cressey, for example, has won two knowledge transfer partnerships in the past four years, worth more than £200k, and involving Bath and North East Somerset Primary Care Trust as the sponsoring organisation. 

The Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences has a full-time Research Development Officer who makes academic and research staff aware of current funding opportunities. She also helps in preparing research applications, something particularly useful for less experienced staff.

DSPS has a senior academic as research coordinator, a research support officer and a research committee, charged with supporting staff research applications, undertaking ethical scrutiny of grant applications, monitoring research grants and publishing Departmental research updates. They work in concert with the other Departments which contribute to this submission. 

4.      Research Community

[UoA40 Panel Criteria Para 8, 26]

We encourage all academic staff, contract researchers and research students to participate in a common research culture and to find professional and personal fulfilment therein. We believe this is key to ensuring sustainability of our research. We are attentive to considerations of equality and diversity and are active in the University’s corresponding support systems.   

4.1.   Research Postgraduates

We provide a stimulating and supportive research environment for our research postgraduates. This has been acknowledged in the ESRC’s recognition of our MRes programmes in Social Policy, European Social Policy, Sociology, and Social Work, along with those in our sister Departments which are part of this submission. The Faculty provides an inter-disciplinary programme for the development of generic research skills.

Research students are provided with good quality accommodation and equipment. They benefit from the excellent facilities of the University Library (including 24 hour opening hours, dedicated subject librarians and access to extensive electronic and hard copy collections). Funding is provided for conference attendance and training in research methods, ethics and generic skills, with additional support available through the Graduate Office, the International Office, Student Support Services, a PG Students Association and PG Ombudsman. 

All research students have one or two supervisors: each also has a panel for more general advice and support. The overall progress and performance of research students is monitored by the Director of Research Students and the Faculty Research Students Committee.  

There is an active community of research postgraduates across the University, organising their own inter-disciplinary annual conference and supported by University directors of postgraduate research development and skills training. At Departmental level, research postgraduates are required to attend relevant research seminars and to give presentations on their work. Most are attached to one of our research groupings. Beyond this, they have in recent years achieved a strong critical mass, generating new initiatives themselves, including their own postgraduate research seminar. Also notable is the foundation of the East Asian Social Policy Association, led by Choi, one of our doctoral students now appointed to a lectureship, and with plans to launch a Journal of East Asian Social Policy, with Gough a member of the Editorial Board.   

4.2.   Research Officers and Research Fellows 

Two of our doctoral students won ESRC post-doctoral fellowships, to start in October 2007, one linked to CASP and the other to WeD. We also won a 2007 RCUK fellowship attached to CDAS and research in Social Work. 

We provide junior researchers with mentoring so that they can become experienced researchers in their own right. Thus, for example, Templeton has progressed under Velleman’s guidance to take responsibility for projects and significant publications. Ridge, following her doctoral studies, has with mentoring by Millar won an ESRC Research Fellowship; SPA made her the ‘Best Newcomer’ award (2006).    

Support for our research staff is developed by the Research Staff Working Group (RSWG), which ensures that the University responds to relevant national initiatives (Roberts funding, New Concordat etc) and disseminates best practice. Each Department has a Research Staff Coordinator to ensure implementation of the RSWG Code of Practice and to provide support, information and advocacy.  There is a University research staff career development adviser.

4.3.   Academic Staff

During the assessment period, five research active staff moved elsewhere: Cramp, Evans, Phoenix, Powell and Rowlingson. Three of these moves have been to Readerships or Chairs: we regard this as a sign of the strength of Social Policy at Bath. The legacy which Evans and Rowlingson left, in terms of quantitative social research and social security analysis, is now being taken forward by Harkness and Standing. Other new arrivals include Bauld, Butler, Feldmann, Gilmore, Judge, Kellehear, Kuhlmann, Wainwright, Walter. Meanwhile, colleagues from adjacent Departments have been reorienting their research towards Social Policy, diversifying the inter-disciplinary research we are able to undertake and strengthening this submission.  

Colleagues at an early stage of their careers have a mentor: they also have reduced teaching and administrative loads. As part of that mentoring, their supervision of research students is commonly undertaken jointly with a more senior colleague.

The University Staff Development Unit offers a range of research-related courses, dealing for example with the preparation of research proposals, project management and consultancy, plus general management and professional skills for research leaders.  

4.4.   Contributing to the External Research Community

The social policy research community at this University does not exist in isolation from the research community nationally and internationally. Many of our esteem indicators attest to our strong and recognised contribution to this external community.

Our journals serve to develop and sustain the wider academic communities in the subject areas concerned. Thus, for example, JESP has supported the development of a European social policy research community, from which ESPAnet, the network for European Social Policy Analysis, has recently emerged. Meanwhile, outside Europe, reference has already been made to our support for the development of an East Asian Social Policy Association.

We contribute to this larger research community also through the national and international conferences that we host. For example, during 2004-5 alone we hosted the ESPAnet Easter School on ‘Governance of Social Policy in the New Europe’; the SPA Annual Conference; and the 7th International Conference on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal.   

5.      ENGAGEMENT WITH EXTERNAL PARTNERS AND RESEARCH USERS

 [UoA40 Panel Criteria Para 24g]

We engage with a wide variety of public, voluntary and private sector partners, in knowledge transfer and development. Their agendas help shape our research priorities.

Section 7 of this document (Esteem Indicators) refers to a wide array of research users at international, national and local levels, with whom we are engaged in this way.  They include:

·        At an international level: World Bank, UN, ILO, WHO, Red Cross 

·        At a European level: European Commission, Eurostat, CEDEFOP, European Foundation 

·        At national level: DWP, DoH, DEFRA, Inland Revenue, Cabinet Office, DES, HSE, ONS, Audit Commission, SCIE and NICE, the Welsh Assembly, Scottish Executive  

·        Non-governmental organisations: Cruse, NCOPF, NCB, Alcohol Concern, ADSS, RCN, Cancer Research UK  

·        At local level: Age Concern Wiltshire, the Wiltshire and Swindon Users Network, Bath and Swindon Surestart, the Early Years Partnership Group.

Our research has involved a number of local research partnerships. For example, in the 1990s the Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health NHS Trust and the University established a Mental Health RDU, headed until recently by Velleman. It has established a strong reputation in the field of substance misuse in particular, with close integration of research and practice, and good throughput of research students. With Wiltshire Social Services we likewise established a local research partnership, directed by Brown and, latterly, Cramp, which involved user groups in the design and conduct of the research: albeit subsequent national changes in the remit of local authority social service departments obliged us to take forward collaboration of this sort under alternative auspices.   

6.      RESEARCH STRATEGY BEYOND RAE 2008 

[UoA40 Panel Criteria Para 28]

The research goals set out in our 2001 RA5 submission have largely been met. Significant numbers of new staff have been integrated into Social Policy research at Bath; we have developed stronger training for research students; our levels of research funding have substantially increased; our external collaborations have strengthened; and research support to staff has been enhanced.  

The four substantive areas of policy on which much of our research now focuses [Section 2 A-D above] build out of the 2001 work on ‘Economy and Welfare’ and ‘Transformation of the Welfare State’. Our research on Globalisation, Wellbeing and Multi-Level Governance [Section 2E above] builds on our 2001 work on ‘Comparative Social Policy’: cross-national comparisons also infuse much of the work in Sections 2A-D.  Finally, our research on Policy Analysis and Design [Section 2F above] builds out of the 2001 work on the ‘new analytics of social policy’. At the same time, we have developed new areas in response to developing staff interests and emerging policy issues. 

Our objectives for the next five years are to continue to develop our research under the six groupings outlined above and to produce research that is analytically and methodologically innovative, with a strong international focus, and a clear application to policy and practice. We already have various new initiatives and externally funded research projects underway, worth in excess of £3.5 million. Examples include:

Work and Welfare: 

Rose is organising an ESRC seminar series (2007-9) on 'Work Attitude Measures in Large Multi-User Surveys'. Millar and Ridge have secured £90k from DWP for a final round of interviews with their sample of lone mothers and their children: this will extend their qualitative longitudinal research and develop a comparative dimension with researchers in US, Australia and New Zealand.

Health and Social Care:

We now have a critical mass of leading experts on tobacco control and public health - Bauld, Gilmore and Judge – and are establishing a Tobacco Control Research Group. Research funds totalling £2.4 million support work into 2008 and beyond. Meanwhile, Templeton and Velleman’s work on social policies for alcohol and drug addiction has attracted continuing funding of £250k, concerned with service evaluation and family response.   

Childhood and Youth:

Here too a critical mass of inter-disciplinary research has developed, which could serve as the basis for a new research centre. Research funding totalling £450k for 2008 and beyond has already been won, some of it international: Ridge is overseas PI to a A$362,000 project, asked to bring 'world's best practice' to Australian research capacity in this field. The Dartington Social Research Unit is our partner in some of this: we jointly supervise PhD students and are involved in Dartington’s new Journal of Children's Services.     

Death and Dying:

CDAS is a leading international centre in this field.  As host of the journal Mortality, it will continue to organise major bi-annual conferences on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal. Sponsorship for CDAS from the National Association of Funeral Directors, of £150k over four years, will support research, education and policy development. BUPA has committed £96k for research on managing end of life care homes.

Globalisation, Wellbeing and Multi-Level Governance: 

Inter-disciplinary research under the WeD programme continues into 2008 with further ESRC funding.  Standing has won £140k for comparative research on flexible labour markets in India and China and the social and economic security of workers, funded by the UNDP and others.  

Policy Analysis and Design: 

Room has won an ESRC Fellowship of £200k to take forward his work on social dynamics and the implications for social policy analysis. Gould has continuing funding from SCIE to work on evidence-based guidelines for mental health; Brown has funding of £115k for more work on service innovation in Australia and the UK.           

In order to ensure that our research strategy is sustainable, we are committed to increasing the number of research students; creating opportunities for post-doctoral research; mentoring new staff; maintaining and strengthening links with user communities and policy-makers at local, national and international levels; and continuing to develop inter-disciplinary research and methodological innovation. These goals are supported by the University through the University Research Strategy. 

7.      ESTEEM INDICATORS

 [UoA40 Panel Criteria Para 30]

A selection of the evidence of esteem in which our research is held, by our research peers, policy makers, user groups and the wider public, can be summarised as follows, and demonstrates strength across the full range of staff submitted:

Policy Advice to international organisations:

Gough was adviser to the UN Research Institute on Social Development (2004). Gilmore is consultant to the World Bank and WHO on tobacco control in the former communist bloc. Harkness is social security consultant to UNDP. Standing is author and coordinator of the ILO 2004 report Economic Security for a Better World and of the UN 2007 Report on the World’s Social Situation. He is also Economic Adviser to the Economic Security Division of the Red Cross.  

To EU institutions:

Cressey is Independent Academic Evaluator of the work programme of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Judge provided the report for the 2005 EU Summit on Health Inequalities under the UK Presidency. Room was rapporteur for two major international seminars on the global dimension of the European Social Agenda, convened by DG Employment. 

To UK Government:

Bauld advises the DOH on the monitoring and evaluation of smoke-free legislation. Breakwellhas advised DoH and DEFRA on risk communication in social and health-related policies. Butler is Cabinet Advisor on Children and Young People’s Policy for the Welsh Assembly Government. Gould served as consultant to the SCIE and as deputy chair of the NICE/SCIE guideline development group for dementia care. Harkness was keynote speaker at the 2005 Treasury/DFES Annual Conference. Judge is a member of the Scottish Public Health Statistics Steering Group and the ONS advisory group on health inequalities. Lawson was a member of the Audit Commission’s Advisory Committee on Inheritance Tax 2003-4. Millar has been Special Adviser to the House of Commons Select Committee for Work and Pensions (Child Support 2004-5 and Employment Targets 2006-7). She was a member of the DWP Lone Parent Steering Group (2003-5) and its Performance Committee (2003-7). 

Ridgegave evidence to the House of Commons Select Committee for Work and Pensions enquiry into child poverty; Velleman to the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, on the National Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy and to the DoH on the development of the National Service Framework for Children’s Services; Walter to the Parliamentary Committee on Cemeteries.  

Policy Advice and Knowledge Transfer to other national and local bodies:

Bauld is Vice-Chair of Cancer Research UK’s tobacco advisory group.  Gilmore is Council and Board member of ASH; a ‘distinguished expert’ serving the National Heart Forum; and a Member of the Royal College of Physicians’ Tobacco Advisory Group. 

Brown has undertaken evaluation and consultancy services for Age Concern Wiltshire, the Wiltshire and Swindon Users Network, Bath and Swindon Surestart and the Early Years Partnership Group. Butler’s work on ‘divorcing children’ has been cited by the Scottish Executive, the Department of Constitutional Affairs and the NI Commissioner for Children and Young People in various service reviews. He was also Chair of Making Research Count (2003): a national collaborative research dissemination initiative, involving ten universities working in regional partnerships with local authorities, NHS Trusts and other agencies. Harkness is on the Steering Committee for projects funded by JRF and DES.  Ridge is trustee and Policy Group member for CPAG.

Rodham’s work on self-harm among young people has been used by the National Children's Bureau and the Samaritans. Velleman has worked with Alcohol Concern, the RCN and the ADSS to produce toolkits for practitioners work with the families of substance misusers.  Templeton is similarly involved with the Scottish Executive

Howarth has been extensively involved in advice to Cruse Bereavement Care. Kellehear was Chair (2000-06) of the Scientific Advisory Committee for the Australian National Centre in HIV Social Research. Walterhas worked with the London Bereavement Forum and the Society of Allied & Independent Funeral Directors. 

Policy Advice and Knowledge Transfer to Other Countries:

Cressey is invited expert to the Swedish Working Life Institute and Swedish Trade Union. Kuhlmann was adviser to the German Government’s Disease Management Programmes for coronary heart disease. Jones provided advice to the Italian government on training for temporary workers. Lawson’s work on health care reform in central Europe is used by the Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe.  Millar advised the New Zealand government on their research into lone parenthood; Ridge is international adviser to child poverty research in Australia. Velleman and Templeton are leading members of the European Network for Children Affected by Risky Environments within the Family, involving researchers and clinicians Europe-wide. Standing has been engaged by the South African Government to review the country's labour policies. He also acts as Adviser to SEWA, the Self-Employed Women’s Association of India, for their social surveys, with financial support from UNIFEM. 

                Research committees:

Butler chaired the SAP ESRC Major and Interim Recognition Exercises (2005/07) for Social Work. There are various links to the ESRC: Butler and Bauldare members of the virtual college and Harkness and Griffin have been members of advisory and commissioning panels. Millar was a member of Research Grants Board 2000-4, and Vice-Chair from 2002. She has also been a member of the New Researcher and Professorial Fellowships panels and chaired the Seminars Competition (2002-3). Breakwell was a member of the Royal Society International Committee from 2002 to 2006.  

Peer Review and Advice:

Millar has been a member of advisory boards and reviews at the Universities of Essex, Loughborough and Oxford, and Professorial Appointment Panels for the Universities of Stirling, Oxford, York, Loughborough, and LSE. Standingsimilarly sat on the Professorial Selection Board at the Institute of Social Studies, The Hague.

International Reviews of research material:

Breakwell  sat as a panel member for the Finnish Research Assessment Exercise (Social Sciences) in 2005.  Room has done the same for the Belgian Ministry of Science Policy (2004-5) and the Austrian Science Fund (2004-5); he also chairs the International Assessment Board of the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (2006-). Millar acted as External Assessor of Research Quality at the Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, 2004 and 2006; and similarly for the Italian Ministry for Education University and Research since 2004.  

                Journals:

Bauld was Editor of Social Policy Review (Volumes 16-18). Butler was Editor of the British Journal of Social Work 1999-2004. Millar has been Chair of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Social Policy since 2005. We are represented on the Editorial Boards of many other journals.   We also host three of our own.  

Awards and prizes and other special recognition:

Millar was awarded an OBE (2001) for 'services to social policy research and teaching'.  We have five elected members of the Academy of Social Sciences: Breakwell, Butler, Gough, Millar and RoomGough has served as Chair of the Committee of Academicians, and as member of the Academy Nominations Committee. Breakwellis Honorary Fellow of the BPS; Judge is an Elected Fellow of the Faculty of Public Health (FFPH).  Gilmore won a Health Foundation Clinician Scientist Fellowship (2006-2011); Gould was Fellow in social care research at the National Institute for Mental Health England (2003-6). Evans, Ridge and Room were awarded ESRC Fellowships and Ridge won the SPA ‘Best Newcomer in Social Policy’ Award 2006.   

International research appointments: 

Gough was Visiting Fellowat the Hanse Wissenschaftskolleg, Bremen, in 2003/4. Walter was Hooker Distinguished Visiting Scholar at McMaster University, Canada in 2004. Standing was Hoffman Global Scholar at Mount Holyoke College, Mass (2006). Feldmann was Visiting Professor at the University of Washington (2001); Gould at Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Kellehear was Visiting Professorship of Australian Studies at the University of Tokyo in 2003/4. Millar was Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University in 2001 and at RMIT in 2003.  Lawson has been made Visiting Professor at Matej Bel University, Slovakia, 2008-10, to work on health and tax policy.  

            International Conferences:

A very small selection of the many plenary and keynote presentations at major international conferences includes Bauld (Berlin 2002: Women, Smoking and Inequalities in Europe); Brown (IASSW International Conference, Chile: 2006); Gilmore (13th World Conference on Tobacco or Health, Washington DC, 2006); Gough(World Bank: New Frontiers of Social Policy: Tanzania: 2005); Gould (IVth Berkeley International Symposium, 2005); Howarth and Walter (2005/2007: International Conferences on Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal); Kellehear (International Biannual Grief & Bereavement Conference, Ontario: 2004); Kuhlmann (Moscow 2005: Russian Society of Sociologists); Millar (Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia: 2003); Rodham (Cornell: 2006: Self-Injurious Behaviour in Adolescents and Young Adults); Room (Vienna 2007: ESPAnet Annual Conference: opening plenary); Standing (Cape Town, 2006: International conference on income security: organiser and chair); Walter (National Museum of Japanese History, Tokyo: 2007).  

Other significant contributions to professional and academic associations: 

Bauld was elected member of the SPA Executive 2001-2004. Butler was Chair of JUC-SWEC (2003-2004). Choi helped found the East Asian Social Policy research network in 2005 and, as its General Secretary, has led the organisation of its international conferences. Ridge is SPA secretary.  

Three ESRC seminar series have been organised: by Griffin (‘Identities and Consumption’ 2005-6), Jones (‘Bringing the Voluntary Sector Back In’ 2005-7) and Rose (‘Work Attitude Measures in Large Multi-User Surveys' 2007-2009). Kuhlmannis coordinator of the European Sociological Association Research Network on Sociology of Professions. 

Judge was Chair of the Harkness Fellowship Selection Committee until 2003. Rose was Research Methods Advisor for the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. 


*Cross-references are to individual publications in RA2.