RI-PATHS project pursued three objectives:
Objective 1: Carry out a comprehensive stocktaking exercise on the existing approaches for impact assessment of RIs and map the current and future data needs of the key stakeholders.
The stocktaking exercise included a literature review of the current analytical methods used for impact assessment of research infrastructures and the design, implementation and analysis of an online survey of RIs and interviews with policy makers and experts. The literature review provided a critical assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the existing main impact assessment methods, highlighting that no single method in its traditional formulation provides a comprehensive and satisfactory answer for the needs of assessing the socio-economic impact of RIs. It was concluded that RI-PATHS guidance should include the most promising existing approaches expanding and combining them to enable fitting analysis of a broader range of impacts. T
Objective 2: Employ a systems approach to develop a modular impact assessment framework that represents all major impact pathways of distinct types of research infrastructures.
The impact assessment framework has been developed in a consecutive manner adopting and revising the initial assumptions in the course of the project. As a first step, a working note on a RI typology was developed. The classification distinguished between RIs that carry out research (basic, use-inspired and applied research) and RIs that deliver research-oriented services. The activities included two rounds of participatory workshops with RIs to further develop the design of the IA framework. The design of the first round of workshops were more exploratory sourcing input from the RI community on the most important impact areas and impact pathways to be included in the IA framework. This work led to detailing of relevant impact areas in four impact categories: 1) Impact on Human Resources; 2) Impact on Economy; 3) Impact on Society; and 4) Impact on Policy. A second round of workshops were structured around three main themes: 1) Quantifiable impacts that can be captured through available quantitative metrics (e.g. economic analysis) ; 2) Non-quantifiable impacts the assessment of which can, however, be supported by quantitative means (e.g. social network analysis, dedicated surveys); 3) Complex network effects captured through qualitative approaches (e.g. narrative-based case studies) and exploratory methods. These participatory events contributed to the prioritisation of relevant indicators and reviewed the applicability of available analytical methods.
Objective 3: Operationalisation of the IA framework by defining a set of reference indicators, providing guidance on the most appropriate monitoring and evaluation approaches and testing its feasibility with pilot research infrastructures.
The final version of the IA framework consisting of 13 generic impact pathways, key findings forming the modularity of the framework, classification of indicators along the impact pathways, more inclusive categorisation of impact areas and lists of examples for reporting tools and applicable analytical methods. The principles of the RI-PATHS IA framework and more in-depth investigation of the methods and approaches for scoping and measuring specific impact areas were undertaken during piloting exercises with the four consortium RIs, as well as three RIs that joined voluntarily.
