Resignation as peer reviewers for UKRI Research Councils
With regret, and against the background of the impacts of the recent cuts to UKRI projects funded through Official Development Assistance (ODA), especially to the GCRF and Newton Funds, we are writing to inform you that we will no longer be available for voluntary peer-reviewing services to UKRI Research Councils.
As you are aware, the GCRF cuts have led to a termination not only of future awards but, to our considerable dismay and shock, to the termination and mutilation of ongoing research projects that had already been awarded, without any regard for the damage caused to: UK academics – many of them early career researchers –, colleagues at research institutions in the Global South, their many partners amongst NGOs and civil society organisations, and the beneficiary communities of ODA-funded research. In addition, the award holders for the flagship GCRF hub projects, and beacon projects such as Network Plus, represent some of the most successful and collaborative research leaders. They have now seen their work destroyed with one stroke of a pen, and their positions, many having taken decades to build, rendered precarious.
Having ourselves been severely affected by these cuts and put in an impossible position vis-à-vis our colleagues and partners, or having seen our colleagues be severely affected, we cannot with a clear conscience continue to contribute to a UK research funding system that allows for such a breach of trust and, almost certainly, to a breach of contracts with people in the UK and abroad. We, like all the PIs of the other over 800 affected projects, have spent many months writing grant proposals, responding to reviewers’ comments, dealing with extensive bureaucratic demands and carrying out due diligence on partners in the Global South – only to realise that we should have done due diligence on our funders instead. Our colleagues and partners in the Global South have invested significant time and energy into setting up and supporting projects – only to now see all their efforts evaporate.
The substantial damage to Britain’s reputation as a global research power and the professional integrity of the researchers is one concern. Another is the undermining of researchers’ investment of years spent on developing cutting-edge research, experience and dedicated international partnership-building, the credibility of which too is threatened. Even more crucial, however, is the silencing of voices that funding streams such as the GCRF and Newton have helped to be heard within communities and, in some realities, this loss could endanger partners who trusted us.
Our experience leaves us doubting that the UK is a trusted partner in global research; that it is at all serious about its G7, G20 or Cop26 commitments or the Sustainable Development Goals. We have witnessed respected research leaders, who represented our work on a number of your own GCRF and International Advisory Boards resign, having not been consulted or informed of the depth or severity of the cuts, and where your own terms of references for these committees were set aside.
At the same time that the funding of over 800 projects is being drastically reduced, UKRI Research Councils are inviting new (non-ODA) research funding applications. While we are aware that the UK Government has imposed a cap on ODA spending for 2021-22, it nonetheless appears unethical that Research Councils who have asked universities to terminate ongoing GRCF and Newton Fund projects or reduce their funding by c.70% on average, would continue funding research as if nothing had happened. It is even more unethical to ask colleagues affected by these cuts to carry out peer-reviewing activities. The lack of seemingly any attempt to find possible solutions in consultation with those affected furthermore suggests that ODA-funded projects somehow produce less valuable research than non-ODA ones. The statement in the FAQs on your ‘ODA Review’ website is wholly inadequate to restoring our faith in the system of peer review or grant award. At the same time we also acknowledge that individual project officers working to support ODA-funded projects have been put in a difficult position by the process, too.
As peer reviewers we are required to comment on due diligence, budgeting, risk management, governance structures and the excellence of the research. Some of our grant portfolios went through over 7 levels of peer reviewing, all voluntary labour we are grateful for. This work, as well as the voluntary work of numerous international partners who co-wrote the applications with us, was dismissed out of hand. This means we cannot continue to provide volunteer labour for a broken system or to put future award holders in a position of having the same experience. Until you are able to demonstrate, through concrete actions, processes and guarantees which are binding, that UKRI has worked to rebuild trust with the research community, and that peer review work will not be treated in such a disrespectful, discourteous and cavalier fashion, then we are, sadly, left with no option but to withdraw our expertise, too.
In this we draw support from the many statements of concern made by our learned societies, by the many academies and by many of our own Higher Education Institutions, who have expressed their understanding and support for our view here that we are left with no option. The integrity of the peer review system is at stake.
The academic system relies on the voluntary labour of academics to carry a large part of the privilege of peer-reviewing. Such a system can only work if it is built on mutuality and trust, both of which have been broken by the UK Government’s cuts and the manner in which you have implemented these cuts. Based on our most recent experience with UK research funding, we cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a system that disrespects colleagues in such a manner.
We fear for future grant holders and we have a duty of care towards them, as do you. Under the current circumstances, the only way we can see this duty of care realised is through the very difficult decision to withdraw our labour from UKRI peer-reviewing and panels.
Yours sincerely,
Prof Berit Bliesemann de Guevara, Aberystwyth University; recipient of the Gold Standard Letter for significant contributions to the AHRC Peer Review College 2019 – resignation from the AHRC Peer Review College, the UKRI Future Leaders Peer Review College, and ESRC peer reviewing.
Prof Mario Novelli, University of Sussex – resignation from the ESRC Peer Review College and the UKRI Future Leaders Peer Review College.
Prof Elena Isayev, University of Exeter – resignation from the AHRC Peer Review College.
Prof Alison Phipps OBE PhD, FRSE, AcSS, FRSA, UNESCO Chair Refugee Integration through Languages and the Arts, University of Glasgow – resignation from AHRC, ESRC and MRC peer reviewing.
Prof Paul Heritage, Queen Mary University of London – resignation from the AHRC Peer Review College.
Prof Dina Kiwan, University of Birmingham - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College.
Prof John Heathershaw, University of Exeter - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College.
Dr Alex Prichard, University of Exeter - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College
Prof Lyla Mehta, Institute of Development Studies - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing Prof. Jeremy Allouche, Institute of Development Studies - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Katherine Brickell, Royal Holloway, University of London - resignation from the ESRC Peer Review College.
Prof Heaven Crawley FAcSS, Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations (CTPSR), Coventry University - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College
Prof Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, UCL - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College
Prof J Boesten, King’s College London – resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Evelyn Arizpe, University of Glasgow - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Suzanne Filteau, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Dr Tiziana Leone, LSE, resignation from MRC and ESRC Peer Review College
Prof Tony Gallagher FAcSS, Queen’s University Belfast - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Paul M Heywood FAcSS, University of Nottingham - resignation from ESRC Peer Review College and all other UKRI peer reviewing
Dr Mia Perry, FRSA, University of Glasgow, resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Dr D Z Belluigi, Queen’s University Belfast - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Ernestina Coast, London School of Economics & Political Science - resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Dr. Ioanna N. Papadopoulou, University of The Peloponnese, Former junior Lecturer at the University of Glasgow- resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Dr Giovanna Fassetta, University of Glasgow, resignation from the AHRC peer review college
Dr Benjamin Thomas White, University of Glasgow, resignation from the AHRC peer review college
Prof David Owen, FAcSS, University of Southampton, resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing.
Prof David Farrier, University of Edinburgh, resignation from the AHRC peer review college
Dr Kirsten Ainley, London School of Economics & Political Science, resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing.
Prof Sian Sullivan, Bath Spa University, resignation from the AHRC peer review college (academic and international), and resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Rashida Ferrand, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine- resignation from all UKRI peer reviewing
Dr Barbara Read, University of Glasgow, resignation from UKRI Future Leaders Peer Review College and all UKRI peer reviewing
Prof Bonnie Slade, University of Glasgow - resignation from all ESRC and UKRI peer reviewing
Dr Julian Brigstocke, University of Cardiff, AHRC gold standard letter recipient. Resignation from AHRC Peer Review College and all UKRI peer reviewing.
Professor Hilary Fooitt, University of Reading. Resignation from the Peer Review College