Viewpoint: we need a blueprint for integrating social sciences and humanities into EU research

The last two EU research framework programmes may have emphasised the importance of the social sciences and humanities in bringing about societal, climate and technological transformations in Europe, but as shown in the European Commission's final monitoring report on their integration in Horizon 2020, blending these disciplines into broader projects and accurately measuring their impact still poses significant challenges.

The most complex and ‘wicked’ societal challenges of our time require fundamentally new forms of knowledge, namely: 'what is' - systems knowledge; 'what could be' - target knowledge; and 'how we get from where we are to where we should be' - transformation knowledge.

This requires the merging of empirical, pragmatic, normative and value-based disciplines with non-science, experience-based, and contextual knowledge. Only such a blend of knowledge and cooperation can lead to new, holistic perspectives and solutions.

In support of this, the Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), the Technical University Delft (TUD) and the Erasmus Medical Center (EMC) have joined forces, at the intersection of basic, applied and mission-driven research, in Convergence, a venture that facilitates new forms of knowledge development and knowledge integration.

Convergence is a transformative and transdisciplinary knowledge alliance that we believe can be a model for integrating social sciences and humanities into broader research frameworks, in order to increase their societal impact.

The approach taken by Convergence goes beyond conventional metrics and employs a nuanced evaluation framework that acknowledges the qualitative dimensions of the contribution made by the social sciences and humanities.

Within Convergence, we break away from conventional, monodisciplinary methods and promote a deliberate integration of knowledge and expertise from the medical, technical and social sciences and humanities.

The Convergence is a civic university alliance where education and research take shape from the complementarity of our institutions, and from physical proximity to each other and societal partners. We aspire to expand, strengthen, and anchor the knowledge ecosystem in sustainable (continuous and inclusive) and engaged (participatory and impactful) ways.

Convergence is thus the (physical) place where our knowledge, experience and expertise are brought in, brought together, built up, expanded and secured, anchored in appropriate relationships with societal stakeholders.

In this way, boundaries between institutions and disciplines are broken down, making it possible to formulate transdisciplinary and transformative perspectives on societal issues and achieve scientific breakthroughs. Here, attention is also paid to the role of scientists in a society where, on one hand, there is a great need for scientifically based knowledge, and on the other, scientific knowledge is not accepted without being questioned.

The latter makes investing in relationships with societal partners and an ongoing dialogue with society both necessary - and challenging - at the same time. It is also a precondition for joint innovation in a social context with complex social issues.

Knowledge transfer

Convergence promotes deliberate, intentional transdisciplinarity, encompasses research, education, and knowledge transfer – with an important cross thematic approach on research methodology and research infrastructures. It is built around five themes: Resilient Delta, Health and Technology; AI, Data & Digitalisation; Pandemic & Disaster Preparedness and Healthy Start, where we study and address issues related to climate change, sustainability, pressure on the healthcare system, urbanisation and digitalisation.

The delta around Rotterdam and Delft, with its businesses, port, rivers, and diverse population, is our living lab, and together with public and private partners, we are building a robust ecosystem for research and innovation. 

For instance, within the Resilient Delta initiative, at physical locations in Rotterdam and Delft, our researchers work together and conduct transdisciplinary research, which results in the design of practical, applicable, and scalable solutions. These include policies, technologies, business models, and methodologies that address societal issues such as rising sea levels, poverty and inequality, health effects of climate change and pollution, population density, and major technological changes and developments.

With he aim of combining the greatest possible breadth of academic expertise with transdisciplinary knowledge from academics and non-academics, Convergence can be characterised as a ‘wide disciplinarity’ initiative. This implies both a bigger potential for innovation and a larger ‘integration deficit’, where the understanding of the societal problems at hand and the possible solution directions don’t align. 

The signature approach is therefore to directly address the ‘integration deficit’ in transdisciplinary research efforts by assigning a leadership role to integration experts in teams. Named as ‘gluon researchers’ in the RDI (after the gluon particle in physics), or ‘healthy start fellows’ in our Healthy Start initiative, these experts:

• Design and implement integration procedures for emerging or existing consortia that result in a shared academic deliverable known as the gluon report.
• Lead, write and own the intermediate content of the gluon report, that contains interdisciplinary hypotheses and proposes streamlined research agendas.
• Evaluate and capture the performance of the applied integration procedures, thus building a stronger foundation for future transdisciplinary efforts and their assessment.

A number of ‘gluon’ researchers and fellows are active in a variety of projects, including externally funded research consortia like Consultation Room 2030, ReDesigning Deltas, and Red & Blue, but also in emerging consortia like the SPRING research collectives, the Immersive Tech Space, or with transdisciplinary partners like the City of Dordrecht (Maasterras). Gluon researchers are also planned for in the national growth fund (Groeifonds) proposals, and projects co-funded by Interreg (Justgreen).

Experience shows that integration expert alleviate the coordination and integration demands usually placed on ‘disciplinary experts’ and accelerates collaborative learning outside of the scope of disciplinary silos. Unlike traditional quality control by peers, quality control of integration reports is via serial review by the participants in the procedure. As a result, academic output is diversified, access to interdisciplinary hypotheses and the creation of streamlined research agendas is better facilitated.

Although the gluon-approach originates from engineering and design ways of thinking, our researchers have an urban design, planning and social sciences and humanities background. This allows creation of shared hypotheses and research agendas that include a diverse understanding of societal challenges, rather than emphasising (engineering) solutions only, as tends to be the case in many transdisciplinary efforts that are rationalised as having impact by proposing solutions.

Second, social sciences and humanities disciplines hold potential to improve and evaluate the gluon approach itself, since a lot of ‘integration expertise’ is present in disciplines such as sociology and public administration.

The European Commission's final monitoring report on integration of social sciences and humanities in Horizon 2020 finds that, “the methodology cannot properly assess the scientific, economic and societal impact achieved through social sciences and humanities participation, nor can it measure the real degree of interdisciplinary collaboration.”

The report implies a need for a shift beyond simplistic quantitative assessments, emphasising the need for specific criteria and thresholds to comprehensively gauge the quality of social sciences and humanities integration.

In line with this need for comprehensive qualitative assessment, the Convergence venture adopts an approach that goes beyond conventional metrics and employs a nuanced evaluation framework that acknowledges the qualitative dimensions of social sciences and humanities contributions. 

Our starting point is identifying not only the diversity of expertise in a given consortium (to anticipate the difficulty), but also the presence of shared deliverables (ideally throughout the existence of a consortium) and the conscious adoption of integrative approaches. The Convergence living labs concept tests and implements solutions locally, ensuring a tangible impact on the communities it serves. 

Furthermore, we challenge the traditional metrics used to evaluate research impact, particularly in social science and humanities. Erasmus University Rotterdam is undertaking a significant transition towards becoming an impact-driven university. This shift is about actively engaging with society, taking responsibility, and striving for positive social impact.

Our guiding principles of evaluating societal impact underline a commitment to contributing to a better understanding of societal challenges and enhancing society's capacity to address them. These principles emphasise the importance of clear strategies, context-specific indicators, and mapping how the institutional environment supports the creation of impact. Societal stakeholders are encouraged to play an active role in shaping ambitions for, and for assessing, societal impact to foster a collaborative and inclusive approach.  

A cornerstone of Erasmus’ qualitative evaluation strategy is the acknowledgment that evaluation is not merely a retrospective activity but a continuous, formative process. The university emphasises the integration of development and learning, seamlessly incorporating impact assessment into strategic planning and execution.

This marks a shift from regarding impact as a fortuitous by-product, to positioning it as a deliberate goal, demanding both specific actions throughout the research process, and a conducive environment. In contrast to measurements relying solely on outcome indicators, this method considers resource capacities and contextual factors crucial for ensuring a positive impact. Importantly, the evaluation is not driven by auditing requirements; instead, it serves as a dynamic tool for continual learning, adjustment, and iteration, underscoring the necessity of ongoing consultation with relevant stakeholders.

We believe this strategy positions Erasmus University Rotterdam at the forefront of research evaluation, setting an example for universities seeking a more holistic and inclusive approach to assessing the societal impact of research in social sciences and humanities. 

Eveline Crone is a professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and academic lead of Healthy Start

Meri Georgievska-van de Laar is EU Liaison Officer at the Erasmus University Rotterdam