Beyond a “niche activity”: the birth of UPEN and the growth of collaboration in academic-policy engagement

Ten years ago, academic-policy engagement was still a niche activity within universities. In the late summer of 2014, I joined UCL, supporting academic colleagues in the Engineering and Physical Sciences disciplines to generate policy impacts through engagement with their research. Having transitioned from a research role into professional services, I was struck by how much engagement work was quietly being carried forward by a small but committed community of staff on professional services contracts, what we now recognise as knowledge mobilisers. These people were working at a handful of UK universities, largely in isolation from one another, to connect academic research with public decision-making.

In those early days, you’d regularly see the same 30 or so people, and we all more or less knew each other by name. Some of us had shared stints in government, parliament, charities, or come from research-related roles. We bumped into each other at conferences or exchanged ideas over coffee at places like the Royal Society. There was genuine camaraderie, but little structure. Without a shared infrastructure, joint efforts to improve evidence use and policy systems often drifted away when each of us returned to our institutions. Joint working between multiple universities and policymakers largely depended on the generosity of personal relationships rather than a collective strategy.

A shifting landscape

Things began to shift in early 2016. At the time, there was intense debate about the potential impact of the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union on research funding, alongside growing concern about how changes to the Charities Act might affect universities’ ability to engage with policymakers. Sifting through old emails recently – my unofficial archive – I came across one that marked a turning point: an invitation to a roundtable on Policy Engagement at King’s College London hosted by Malcolm Grant from King’s Policy Institute, Robert Doubleday from the Cambridge Centre for Science and Policy, and Michael Kenny from Queen Mary’s Mile End Institute.

These three institutions already had well-established academic-policy engagement units, and what emerged from that roundtable was the sense that something collective was needed. There was healthy scepticism, especially given the competitiveness between institutions, but also clear appetite. We didn’t want another exclusive group or yet another layer of institutional infrastructure for the benefit of the few. Instead, we were keen to create something informal, focused on shared learning and coordination, a space to explore how best to connect research to policy, without duplicating or undermining existing work. The seed for what would become UPEN had been planted.

UCL Public Policy hosted the follow-up meeting in June 2016. That’s when the conversation shifted from, if we should form a network, to how. There were questions: Would our institutions back us? Would this be recognised as serious, strategic work? The room too had broadened; Oxford, Bath, Sheffield, Manchester, Nottingham, Durham, Warwick, Bristol, and this was where the Universities Policy Engagement Network was coined.

…we were keen to create something informal, focused on shared learning and coordination — a space to explore how best to connect research to policy, without duplicating or undermining existing work.

After that meeting, within the UCL Public Policy team, we were convinced that if UPEN was going to succeed, it had to be collaborative, inclusive, and grounded in practice. Working with colleagues Sarah Chaytor, Director of Strategy and Policy at UCL and Professor Graeme Reid, who had not long joined UCL from the Civil Service, we spent time with others from across the sector talking and refining how to articulate a shared vision, not of competition, but of collective effort. Our vision didn’t always land as we had hoped, with colleagues on occasions fearing UPEN would erode their first mover advantage.

Creating infrastructure

Undeterred, we began putting modest but important building blocks in place. A JISCmail list, roster of cross-institutional meetings, and wider invitations helped UPEN take root. We were practical in focus, exchanging learning on how to create mechanisms for success, from convening power to long-term partnerships, and how to build recognition that policy stakeholders are not a homogenous group. We also explored how to anticipate policy needs better, navigate relationships with academic disciplines, and balance our local, national, and international activities. These foundational conversations helped shape a network that would be adaptive, credible, and collaborative.

We worked out pretty quickly that we wanted policy voices in the network and by the time Nottingham hosted the third meeting, we met at the House of Commons and it was sponsored by the Parliamentary Information and Outreach Service. Forty of us from academia and public policy debated timely issues like the rise of “post-fact” politics and the role of evidence in decision-making. That meeting marked a turning point: not because of a single announcement, but because it was clear that momentum was building for — and within — UPEN.

From there, green shoots kept growing. People started referring to “that informal policy engagement network of universities.” Membership grew deliberately, drawing in people working in strategic roles, with institutional backing for academic-policy engagement. But UPEN as an entity with all the trappings you need to run an effective network, still had a long way to go.

Becoming UPEN

For several years, UPEN continued to exist informally but energetically. During this time, UCL Public Policy provided coordination and meeting support that brought together interesting speakers and timely topics. The network crowd-sourced ideas, evolved organically, and tested appetites for collaborative activities and their limits. We invited speakers based on our collective connections, and early highlights included Claire Craig (a former civil servant, then at the Royal Society) and Robin Grimes (who was the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office’s Chief Scientific Advisor). We began holding meetings with government departments to explore shared interests, such as Areas of Research Interest (ARIs) and collaborative policymaking. It wasn’t always easy; we struggled to engage senior policymakers and attract the attention of Vice-Chancellors.

Early descriptions of UPEN capture its guiding spirit:

“A network of university professionals working to engage academic research with public policy and improve the use of evidence in policymaking. Our aims are to share best practice and useful knowledge, and support collaborative activity where appropriate.”

Outside of meetings, members began exploring ways to deepen engagement, both with one another and with policy stakeholders under the UPEN banner. But it wasn’t until early 2019 that UPEN’s leadership structure formalised, with Gavin Costigan as the first Chair and modest seed funding from Southampton’s Impact Acceleration Account. At this point, UPEN began to cohere as a network with operational functions: we developed a website, clarified our mission and brand identity, and began to think more intentionally about governance, roles, and purpose. And each successive Chair — Stephen Meek, Matt Flinders, and Sarah Chaytor, Chris Hewson and Andy Brown — has brought leadership and momentum, helping grow the network’s reach and reputation.

Today, the network has grown in ambition and scale. What began with just over a dozen universities has now evolved into a network of more than 110, expanding UPEN across all UK nations, enabling policy organisations to engage with multiple universities through a single network, supporting the professionalisation of policy engagement and knowledge mobilisation across the higher education sector. Throughout this journey, UCL Public Policy has remained an active, shaping both strategy and delivery, and helping to build the foundation, but we owe a great deal to those who built the operational heart of the network, Julie Cantalou, Kayleigh Renberg-Fawcett, Alex Glegg, and Laura Bea, whose coordination roles helped nurture the community and infrastructure sustaining UPEN today.

Looking forward

With the recent announcement of £5.9 million investment (£5 million from Research England, plus additional funding from ESRC and UKRI), UPEN is yet again entering another new phase. This is a moment of real possibilities both for the network and for academic-policy engagement more broadly.

This investment signals a clear commitment to strengthening academic-policy engagement across the UK. It will help UPEN move from a voluntary network to a sustainable, strategic organisation, capable of supporting more universities, deepening place-based engagement, embedding community and citizen voices in public policy, and building models that can endure.

As I reflect on my journey with UPEN, what stands out most is what’s endured: the founding spirit — openness, collaboration, and a shared commitment to doing the work of academic-policy engagement better. My personal hope is that this spirit remains just as alive in the years to come as it is today.