Each entity has developed or is developing distinct strategies that reflect their specific research landscapes and priorities. While some adopt data-driven approaches, others rely on qualitative narratives. Common challenges, such as measuring societal impact and resource constraints, highlight areas for potential improvement and collaboration.
Collaboration between councils for sharing best practices and developing standardised methodologies could be beneficial. Smaller councils, in particular, would benefit from increased infrastructure sharing dedicated to impact assessment, enabling more effective and comprehensive strategies.
Furthermore, developing methods for tracking and evaluating the long-term impacts of research would be essential, as many significant effects unfold over extended periods.
Considering methodology, a balanced integration of both quantitative data and narrative-based methods may provide a more holistic view of research impact. Councils should remain continually refining their tools and approaches for impact assessment to stay aligned with evolving research fields and societal needs. Here, a proactive and collaborative approach may significantly enhance the effectiveness and accuracy of research impact measurement in the Nordic region since all toil with the same questions and dilemmas.
Standardising some methodologies, may increase efficiency, as it could reduce redundant efforts and allow for better allocation of resources. Such partial uniformity may also enable meaningful comparisons across different landscapes and disciplines, providing a clearer picture of the effectiveness of research initiatives region wide. Collaboration fosters this sharing of best practices and innovative methodologies, enhancing the quality and effectiveness of impact assessments. Broadening perspectives through cross-country cooperation may enrich the overall understanding and analysis of research impact. Additionally, such collaborative efforts would support policy alignment at a regional level, ensuring that research strategies and funding are more effectively aligned with shared objectives and challenges. This begs the question of what kind of forum and workflow would be prudent in the facilitation of effective collaboration.
The integration of digital tools and workflows for reporting and assessment in research impact measurement can significantly streamline and enhance the process of data gathering and analysis. Digital tools offer efficient data collection, processing, and analysis capabilities, enabling more sophisticated and timely assessments. They also facilitate data visualisation and reporting, making it easier to communicate complex impact pathways to various stakeholders. Moreover, digital workflows can ensure more consistent and standardised approaches while retaining flexibility for context-specific assessments. An efficient digital infrastructure would ensure that data collection and storage are systematic and secure.
Further, a structured database allows for the organisation of diverse data types, making it easier to retrieve and analyse information. Having the right software and knowledge to collate, analyse, and report on impact is crucial for accurately interpreting data and drawing meaningful conclusions. These components can collectively enhance the reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness of the research impact assessment process.
Maintaining context-specific assessments captures nuances, especially through qualitative assessments such as narratives and case studies. These methods provide in-depth insights that standardised quantitative approaches might overlook. They capture the unique cultural, societal, and disciplinary aspects of research impact, which are essential for a comprehensive understanding.
Conclusively, the Nordic systems present similarities and disparities. These systems seem to have evolved organically and out of necessity, in contrast to having been constructed systematically in the light of a clear theoretical framework, relating to the difficulties in defining impact in the first place.