Fisher Oliver J, Fearnshaw Debra, Watson Nicholas J, Green Peter, Charnley Fiona, McFarlane Duncan, Sharples Sarah
Food, Water, Waste Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, UK.
Human Factors Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, UK.
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2024 May 16;9(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41073-024-00144-w.
Equal, diverse, and inclusive teams lead to higher productivity, creativity, and greater problem-solving ability resulting in more impactful research. However, there is a gap between equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) research and practices to create an inclusive research culture. Research networks are vital to the research ecosystem, creating valuable opportunities for researchers to develop their partnerships with both academics and industrialists, progress their careers, and enable new areas of scientific discovery. A feature of a network is the provision of funding to support feasibility studies - an opportunity to develop new concepts or ideas, as well as to 'fail fast' in a supportive environment. The work of networks can address inequalities through equitable allocation of funding and proactive consideration of inclusion in all of their activities.
This study proposes a strategy to embed EDI within research network activities and funding review processes. This paper evaluates 21 planned mitigations introduced to address known inequalities within research events and how funding is awarded. EDI data were collected from researchers engaging in a digital manufacturing network activities and funding calls to measure the impact of the proposed method.
Quantitative analysis indicates that the network's approach was successful in creating a more ethnically diverse network, engaging with early career researchers, and supporting researchers with care responsibilities. However, more work is required to create a gender balance across the network activities and ensure the representation of academics who declare a disability. Preliminary findings suggest the network's anonymous funding review process has helped address inequalities in funding award rates for women and those with care responsibilities, more data are required to validate these observations and understand the impact of different interventions individually and in combination.
In summary, this study offers compelling evidence regarding the efficacy of a research network's approach in advancing EDI within research and funding. The network hopes that these findings will inform broader efforts to promote EDI in research and funding and that researchers, funders, and other stakeholders will be encouraged to adopt evidence-based strategies for advancing this important goal.
平等、多元且包容的团队能带来更高的生产力、创造力以及更强的问题解决能力，从而产生更具影响力的研究成果。然而，在平等、多元和包容（EDI）研究与营造包容性研究文化的实践之间存在差距。研究网络对研究生态系统至关重要，为研究人员创造了宝贵机会，使其能够与学术界和实业界建立合作关系、推动职业发展并开拓新的科学发现领域。网络的一个特点是提供资金以支持可行性研究，这是一个在支持性环境中开发新概念或新想法以及“快速失败”的机会。网络的工作可以通过公平分配资金以及在其所有活动中积极考虑包容性来解决不平等问题。
本研究提出了一种将EDI融入研究网络活动和资金评审流程的策略。本文评估了为解决研究活动和资金分配中已知的不平等问题而引入的21项计划缓解措施。从参与数字制造网络活动和资金申请的研究人员那里收集EDI数据，以衡量所提议方法的影响。
定量分析表明，该网络的方法成功地创建了一个种族更加多元化的网络，吸引了早期职业研究人员，并支持了有护理责任的研究人员。然而，需要做更多工作来在网络活动中实现性别平衡，并确保申报残疾的学者得到代表。初步研究结果表明，该网络的匿名资金评审过程有助于解决女性和有护理责任的人员在资金授予率方面的不平等问题，但需要更多数据来验证这些观察结果，并单独和综合理解不同干预措施的影响。
总之，本研究提供了关于研究网络方法在研究和资金方面推进EDI有效性的有力证据。该网络希望这些发现将为在研究和资金方面促进EDI的更广泛努力提供参考，并鼓励研究人员、资助者和其他利益相关者采用基于证据的策略来推进这一重要目标。
