What started as a central government tool is blooming across the UK. Areas of Research Interest (ARIs) – a tool that help policymakers identify research priorities and connect with academics – have evolved far beyond Whitehall. Local governments, combined authorities, devolved legislatures, and public bodies have developed their own ARIs, creating a patchwork of place-based approaches to evidence-informed policymaking.
A Movement Taking Root
The numbers tell the story: at least 20 new ARIs are currently in development, with many more in the pipeline. This growth prompted Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) and Northumbria University to map these diverse approaches being adopted in localities and regions in a practical ‘how to’ guide, which became the foundation for the event.
Over fifty participants from academic and policy organisations gathered to discuss the opportunities for ARIs to further policymaking and knowledge exchange in the North East and other regions across the UK, and grapple with a fundamental question: Should we, (and if so, how) move from the current “many flowers bloom” approach to a more integrated regional ecosystem of ARIs?
The energy in the room was palpable. Participants could clearly see the potential of regional collaboration – imagine ARIs that set agendas for knowledge mobilisers, link local priorities to national policy, and create tight networks around shared challenges rather than isolated initiatives.
The energy and momentum weren’t just theoretical – they were grounded in real progress. Across the country, councils and combined authorities had been experimenting with ARIs in ways that were already yielding results. Creating embedded roles through fellowships or secondments, securing senior leadership buy-in, creating space for open dialogue and community engagement, and ring-fenced funding were identified as key “what works” ingredients to build trust and turn ARIs into tools for genuine collaboration.
The Promise and the Pitfalls
The appetite for regional approaches was evident, but so were the challenges. Participants raised critical questions about day-to-day impact, community tokenism, and long-term sustainability. The spectre of “ARI overload” loomed large, alongside concerns about funding constraints, meaningful collaboration, and finding time for what some might see as non-essential work.
Yet the opportunities were equally compelling. A regional ARI could serve as a “front door” for partnerships, align with, for example, North East Combined Authority objectives, and drive tangible policy change. The vision extends ARIs beyond technocratic tools toward relational knowledge exchange, where conversations and relationships become the foundation for evidence-informed decision-making.
Beyond the Technocratic
Perhaps the most striking insight from the day was the recognition that successful ARIs must transcend their government origins. As Max French from Northumbria University challenged the group: What if we moved from individual research priorities to shared ones? What if ARIs became platforms to influence national policy from the ground up?
This isn’t just about coordination – it’s about transformation. The discussion revealed a hunger for ARIs that bridge the gap between academic research and community needs, that operate at the right spatial scale (whether estate, district, city, or region), and that honour the pride and identity present at every geographical level.
Navigating the Tensions
The path forward isn’t without complexity. Participants identified 19 distinct questions about ARI development, from funding mechanisms to creating shared language across sectors. The challenge of scale emerged repeatedly – how do you maintain local relevance while achieving regional impact? How do you avoid meaningless consultation while ensuring genuine community engagement?
These tensions aren’t obstacles to overcome but dynamics to navigate. The most innovative place-based approaches recognise that effective ARIs must be simultaneously rooted in local priorities and connected to broader networks of influence.
Measuring what matters
Evaluation also emerged as an essential, yet underdeveloped, aspect of the ARI ecosystem. Participants highlighted the need for both simple metrics, like response rates and engagement levels, alongside more complex indicators, such as shifts in organisational culture or influence on policy.
However, questions surfaced around how to track the influence of ARIs over time, how to integrate the purpose of an ARI into its evaluation, and who to get feedback from and when. Ultimately, the group agreed that robust, flexible evaluation frameworks are essential, not just to prove that ARIs work, but to improve how they work.
The Road Ahead
This conversation continues at a Peer Exchange event in York on 2nd July this year, where innovators from across the UK will share their place-based approaches. This isn’t just about learning from each other – it’s about building the relationships that will determine whether collaborative ARIs can deliver on their promise.
The question isn’t whether place-based ARIs will continue to proliferate – they will. The question is whether we can move beyond isolated blooms toward a thriving ecosystem that amplifies local voices while strengthening the connection between evidence and policy.
As we stand at this crossroads, discussions at the December event demonstrated something critical: the appetite for change exists. Now comes the harder work of turning that appetite into action, one relationship and one shared priority at a time.
The authors thank all participants and speakers who contributed to the 10th December event at the Common Room in Newcastle, with particular appreciation for the flipchart notetakers who captured the richness of these vital conversations.
