Evaluating Research and Scholarly Impact in Criminology and Criminal Justice in the United Kingdom and Italy: A Comparative Perspective

Abstract

What scholarly impact is, and how it is evaluated, vary across different countries. In the United Kingdom, for instance, scholarly impact is mainly assessed through the Research Excellence Framework (REF) in the context of providing—among other things—accountability for public investment in research, demonstrating the public benefits of research, and informing the selective allocation of research funding. In the REF system, impact needs to show a demonstrable effect on change, or evidence of benefits outside academia, and is formally assessed through case studies. In Italy, there is a comparable system for evaluating research, known as Evaluation of Research Quality, but in this latter case, the focus is on the quality of selected research outputs as indicators of research performance. Impact is here considered with reference to the so-called third mission (which includes activities aimed at the valorization of research, and activities that have positive spillovers into society at large) and is evaluated separately. Our contribution aims at critically analyzing the commonalities and differences of these two systems when it comes to evaluating research in Criminology and Criminal Justice, considering some of the benefits and potential pitfalls of research evaluation in both regions, and discussing how these disciplines are framed and delimited differently in the two countries considered.