Media and information literacy: navigating a complex landscape

Posted on October 24, 2022 by hannahbrunton95

By Hannah Brunton

UNESCO’s Global Media and Information Literacy Week 2022 takes place from 24-31 October 2022 under the theme of “Nurturing Trust”, giving governments, educators, information professionals, and media professionals the chance to discuss and reflect on critical issues that the world is facing in relation to misinformation and disinformation, and the challenges of navigating the online environment.

What is media and information literacy?

Media and information literacy (MIL) is defined by UNESCO as “an interrelated set of competencies that help people to maximise advantages and minimize harms in the new information, digital and communication landscapes”.

Previously, media literacy (ML) and information literacy (IL) have been treated as distinct concepts, with ML focusing specifically on media engagement, and IL referring in a broader sense to information skills such as search, discovery, access, analysis, and management.

In the early 2000s, UNESCO united the concepts under the umbrella term of media and information literacy (MIL), and while there is still some debate among ML and IL experts about whether this is the best approach, it is generally accepted that there is value in grouping them together to develop holistic policies and initiatives.

The UK’s Media and Information Literacy Alliance (MILA) have chosen also to treat the two concepts as one. They define MIL as “the ability to engage fully with media and information in people’s connected daily lives…engaging with media and information safely and healthily, critically and actively, with positive social consequences”.

Key MIL competencies include the skills and abilities to find, critically evaluate, interpret, manage, create, communicate, store, and share media and information, both online and offline.

Why is it important?

With rapid technological developments in recent decades and the exponential growth of media and information online, it is vital that people are equipped to navigate this increasingly complex landscape. MIL is therefore becoming a growing priority for key stakeholders including librarians, teachers, policymakers, media professionals, and youth organisations.

UNESCO estimates that 60% of the global population are internet users, and as this number grows and social media becomes an increasingly powerful tool, it is vital that people across the world can recognise potentially harmful content and prevent its spread.

MILA and UNESCO have highlighted concerns about the spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories around Covid-19, the climate crisis and violent extremism, and have warned that the spread of such misinformation threatens to weaken social unity, undermine democracy, and erode trust in government and the media on a global scale.

Increased access to online environments has led to a blurring of the lines between consumers and producers of information. As it becomes easier to create and share content online, it becomes increasingly difficult to effectively evaluate such content, distinguish between reliable and unreliable sources, and form balanced and informed perspectives.

The skills associated with MIL are crucial to addressing these issues, and there is a clear case for MIL initiatives that help people to develop these skills as a part of their lifelong learning. Being able to understand where information comes from, identify ‘fake news’, recognise bias, think critically about different perspectives, and create and share media responsibly, can encourage greater civic engagement and empower individuals and communities to create positive change.

MIL initiatives and resources

UNESCO are leaders in the global MIL arena in terms of influencing policy and strategy. Their Media and Information Literacy Alliance (distinct from the UK’s MILA) was set up to facilitate strategic partnerships and networks among the global MIL community and is open to all organisations and individuals.

UNESCO have various MIL-related publications including their MIL Policy and Strategy Guidelines, the MIL Curriculum aimed at both educators and learners, the Global MIL Assessment Framework for assessing country readiness, and the MIL Cities framework aimed at key stakeholders in the development of MIL at the city level. The MIL CLICKS campaign has been designed to encourage individuals to critically evaluate information before sharing it online.

In the UK, MILA was launched in response to the government’s Online Media Literacy Strategy, which was published by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in July 2021. DCMS have since launched their Media Literacy Programme Fund which is intended to award grants for UK media literacy initiatives.

MILA have recently published the MILA Framework, a draft Information Literacy Impact Framework and a guide focused on disinformation around the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They have also launched a ‘Disinformation Step by Step’ MOOC (massive open online course) for educators, librarians, teachers and journalists, and have previously delivered free webinars during 2021’s Global MIL Week.

Building a media and information literate Scotland

Last month, CILIP Scotland ran an afternoon of online sessions on Building a Media, Digital and Information Literate Scotland, as part of their series of online Autumn Gatherings.

The event included a presentation on UNESCO’s MIL initiatives by Sheila Webber, Director of the Centre for Information Literacy Research at the University of Sheffield. Webber discussed the scope and impact of UNESCO’s work on MIL, noting the value of their publications and initiatives while highlighting the need for stronger partnerships and communication between stakeholders at the global level.

A panel discussion took place on issues around MIL for young people in Scotland and included a conversation about ‘Maddie is Online’ – a project aimed at developing MIL among pre-teen children through a video cartoon series addressing key challenges of the online environment.

The event also included a presentation on Ofcom’s ‘Making Sense of Media’ project, which involved in-depth research on the current state of media literacy in the UK and pilot initiatives promoting MIL among underserved communities.

A session delivered by Dr Ann Wales from the Digital Health & Care Innovation Centre discussed the ‘Information for Wellbeing’ course which was recently developed with NHS Scotland and the Scottish Library and Information Council (SLIC), to equip library staff with skills to help users find trusted health and wellbeing information. Dr Wales emphasised the importance of literacies in enabling engagement and influencing national policy change.

Final thoughts

There is a clear need for focused efforts to develop MIL and enable people to engage effectively with media and information. As demonstrated by the work of UNESCO and MILA, collaboration and strategic partnerships are key, and initiatives like Global MIL Week offer a valuable opportunity for the international and cross-sectoral communication needed to coordinate the global effort to ensure MIL for all.

Further reading: more about information, media and digital skills on the Knowledge Exchange blog:

Skilling up: the case for digital literacy

Social media: does it influence political participation?

Assessing information quality: sorting the wheat from the CRAAP

“All the lonely people” – tackling the epidemic of loneliness

Posted on May 23, 2022 by heathercameron25

Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the UK was already experiencing what had been described as an ‘epidemic’ of loneliness. The various lockdowns and social restrictions that were put in place to reduce the spread of the virus have exacerbated this already troubling situation.

Indeed, according to recent research by the Mental Health Foundation, 1 in 4 UK adults (25%) have felt lonely some, or all of the time, over the previous month; and 1 in 4 UK adults (25%) felt ashamed about being lonely.

With the huge impact this can have on mental health, it’s no surprise the theme of this year’s Mental Health Awareness Week was loneliness.

In its new report, “All the lonely people”, published as part of Mental Health Awareness Week, the Mental Health Foundation explores the clear links between loneliness and mental health, looking at what it’s like to be lonely, the causes, consequences and the groups of people who are more likely to experience severe and enduring loneliness.

All the lonely people

Through sharing the stories of nine individuals who often or always feel lonely, “All the lonely people” highlights the circumstances, situations and life events that can increase our risk of loneliness. It also investigates how well people understand loneliness and suggests ways that we can respond as individuals and across society.

While it is acknowledged that anyone can feel lonely, there are a number of risk factors that can increase the chances of severe and lasting loneliness that can impact mental health:

Being widowed
Being single
Being unemployed
Living alone
Having a long-term health condition or disability
Living in rented accommodation
Being between 16 and 24 years old
Being a carer
Being from an ethnic minority community
Being LGBTQ+

The health and financial impact of loneliness

Loneliness can have a huge impact on health, life expectancy and mental wellbeing. Research has shown that loneliness can be as harmful as smoking 15 cigarettes a day or having alcohol use disorder. Moreover, it has also been found to be more harmful than obesity. Not only does this have implications for individuals but also for wider society and the economy.

Recent government research estimated that the wellbeing, health and work productivity cost associated with severe loneliness (feeling lonely “often” or “always”) on individuals was around £9,900 per afflicted person per year. Other research has estimated that loneliness costs UK employers between £2.2 and £3.7 billion a year and that an estimated £1,700 per person (2015 values) could be saved over 10 years if action could be taken to reduce loneliness.

Given the significant health impacts and associated costs, the Mental Health Foundation report argues that preventing the development of loneliness should be a key priority and that a greater awareness of the risk factors and triggers needs to be created.

Public understanding but stigma remains

In terms of public understanding, the report asserts that the public has a good understanding of the link between loneliness and mental health. However, there is still significant stigma surrounding loneliness. Of the adults surveyed, 76% thought ‘people often feel ashamed or embarrassed about feeling lonely’. Only 29% of respondents agreed that ‘people who feel lonely are likely to talk about it, if they get the opportunity’. And people who experience loneliness themselves were more likely to recognise this sense of shame.

This stigma makes it difficult for people to talk about due to fears of discrimination or prejudice. Stereotypes about loneliness also still persist which can lead to some lonely people being overlooked. The findings show that despite the public’s understanding, there is a tendency to overlook certain at risk groups such as students, carers and LGBTQ+ people. People also tend to overestimate the link between loneliness and ageing or living in rural areas.

The survey found that people tended to believe that older people were more likely to feel lonely than younger age groups – 63% thought that being older (over 65) might contribute to someone feeling more lonely, whereas only 12% of respondents identified that being younger (aged 16-25) might contribute to someone feeling more lonely. This contradicts recent ONS data, which found that there were higher rates of reported loneliness among younger age groups.

Similarly, people tended to believe people living in rural areas would be more likely to experience loneliness (40% of people thought that living in a rural area could contribute to loneliness, compared to just 23% for living in a city). However, once again, the evidence suggests the opposite, with people living in urban areas reporting higher levels of loneliness than those in rural areas.

The report notes that stereotypes such as these can inhibit people from recognising and responding to their own loneliness, further exacerbate existing stigma and potentially limit the support offered to those who feel lonely.

Broader awareness

The report argues that a wider understanding of the factors that can lead to severe and enduring loneliness is needed to successfully combat the stigma and stereotypes associated with loneliness.

The stories of the individuals who experience loneliness demonstrate just how complex it is and how difficult it is to spot those who may be ‘lonely in a crowd’. It is therefore also important to understand the different barriers to connection for different people. These can be practical (lack of time, access to transport), structural (discrimination or prejudice) or emotional (lack of confidence, anxiety).

The report argues that a broader awareness of these factors could help people to stop blaming themselves for being lonely, encourage creative ways of supporting people and enable tailored support being developed for groups who are particularly at risk of long-term loneliness.

Previous research has also highlighted the importance of tailored approaches and developing approaches that avoid stigma.

Tackling loneliness

While highlighting what individuals can do to help combat loneliness, the Mental Health Foundation also highlights the need for action on the different barriers to connection if it is be tackled long-term. To this end, it has identified five UK-wide policy recommendations to address loneliness in society:

taking a strategic approach to loneliness;
developing the community resources needed to tackle loneliness;
building a greener lived environment that supports social contact;
supporting children and young people with interventions in education settings;
ensuring that everyone has access to digital communication technology, and the skills to use it, and respecting preferences for non-digital forms of communication.

Each of us can play a part too. By sharing stories of loneliness and shining a spotlight on the issue, we can all help to promote wider awareness and break the stigma of loneliness.

If you enjoyed reading this, you may also like:

Follow us on Twitter to find out which topic are interesting our research team

‘Breaking the bias’ – gender equality and the gig economy

Posted on March 9, 2022 by heathercameron25

Yesterday marked the 111th International Women’s Day, a global day of celebration for the social, economic, cultural and political achievements of women. But it is also an opportunity to reflect on and further the push towards gender equality.

While there has been much to celebrate, it has been suggested that the pandemic threatens to reverse decades of progress made towards gender equality as women have been hit harder both socially and economically than men. However, the shift in working practices during the pandemic may help to transform the future of work to the benefit of women.

There has been continued growth in the digital platform or gig economy workforce, with many women entering this type of work because of the pandemic. The gig economy has been shown to have the potential to improve gender equality in the economy, but it is not without its challenges when it comes to gender parity, as recent research has highlighted.

A platform for gender equality?

The report from the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) highlights that the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and platform or gig work has the potential to create new opportunities for gender equality, but at the same time can reinforce gender stereotypes, sexism and discrimination in the labour market. It found that some of the key attractions of gig work such as its flexibility, are often disadvantageous to women.

The EIGE surveyed almost 5000 workers in the platform economy across 10 countries to understand who they are, why they do platform work, and what challenges they face. It found that:

a higher share of women (45%) than men (40%) among regular platform workers indicated that they worked on digital labour platforms because they were a good way to earn (additional) income;
flexibility, expressed as the ability to choose working hours and location, motivated about 43% of women and 35% of men;
a higher share of women (36%) than men (28%) said they do platform work because they can combine it with household chores and family commitments;
36% of women started or restarted platform work because of the pandemic, compared to 35% of men.

The flexibility of platform work has consistently been referred to as the main motivating factor for engaging in such work. And this flexibility has been found to be more important for women, particularly in relation to family commitments. In practice, however, the research shows that flexibility is limited, with as many as 36% of women and 40% of men working at night or at the weekend, and many working hours they cannot choose.

On the plus side of the gender equality debate, it seems the gig economy is slightly less gender-segregated than the traditional labour market, with a higher share of men doing jobs usually done by women. For example, traditionally female-dominated sectors such as housekeeping and childcare are more gender-diverse in the gig economy:

housework (women: 54%, men: 46%)
childcare (women: 61%, men: 39%)
data entry (women: 47%, men: 53%)

But the EIGE’s survey also suggests a degree of skills mismatch and overqualification in platform work that affects women in particular. It suggests that highly educated women are more likely to do jobs that do not match their level of education, putting them at greater risk of losing their skills.

Gender bias in AI

The report also shines a light on the issue of gender bias in AI which can be a particular issue in the gig economy where such systems are frequently used.

It argues that gender bias can be embedded in AI by design, reflecting societal norms or the personal biases of those who design the systems. For example, the use of algorithms that are trained with biased data sets perpetuate historically discriminatory hiring practices which can lead to female candidates being discarded.

Platform workers can also be monitored using time-tracking software, which deducts ‘low productivity time’ from pay, increasing ‘digital wage theft’, to which women are more vulnerable.

Considering just 16% of AI professionals in the EU and UK are women – a percentage which decreases with career progression – this is something that needs to be addressed if gender parity in the gig economy, and indeed the entire modern economy, is to be achieved.

Way forward

The EIGE report welcomes new proposed EU legislation to improve the working conditions of platform workers and the EU’s proposed ‘Artificial Intelligence Act’, suggesting this shows promise when it comes to minimising the risk of bias and discrimination in AI. Also highlighted as a positive sign, is the EU’s commitment to train more specialists in AI, especially women and people from diverse backgrounds.

Nevertheless, one of the conclusions of the report is that regulations and policy discussions on platform work are largely gender blind and that action is required on multiple levels to address gender inequalities and discrimination in the gig economy.

To this end, the report recommends that the EU needs to do the following:

mainstream gender into the policy framework on AI-related transformation of the labour market;
increase the number of women in, and the diversity of, the AI workforce;
address the legal uncertainty in the employment status of platform workers to combat disguised employment;
address gender inequalities in platform work;
ensure that women and men platform workers can access social protection.

There are lessons here for the UK too. Perhaps the fulfilling of these actions will go some way to improving the situation by the time we get to the next International Women’s Day.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also like some of our previous posts:

Follow us on Twitter to see which topics are interesting our research officers and keep up to date with our latest blogs

More than growing pains: young people and mental health

Posted on January 24, 2022 by holliewilson6

The last few decades have seen increasing rates of mental health disorders among children and young people. But while children and young people’s mental health is currently high on the public agenda, many of these mental health conditions remain unrecognised and untreated.

The NHS conducted a Mental Health Survey for Children and Young People in 2017, interviewing 3,667 children and young people, which was followed up in 2021. The follow-up survey found that 39.2% of 6 to 16 year olds had experienced a decrease in their mental health since 2017, while approximately 52% of 17 to 23 year olds also reported a decrease. Within these last four years, a number of factors appear to have impacted these figures, including the continued rise and prominence of social media platforms, family life, and, of course, the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

Impact of the pandemic

The beginning of the pandemic marked the closure of all schools, colleges and universities. Not only were young people faced with the anxiety and stress associated with living through a global pandemic, particularly for those who are immunocompromised or have family members who are, but these closures also cut off access to resources for mental health problems. A survey by YoungMinds in January 2021 found that among over 2000 participants who were under the age of 25 in the UK with a history of mental illness, 75% agreed that they were finding the current lockdown harder to cope with than the previous ones, and 67% believed that the pandemic will have a long-term negative effect on their mental health.

Peer support groups and face to face services such as counselling that could be accessed through school were closed, or made accessible through the internet or over the phone. While this does offer some kind of continued support, it is not a form of support that works for everyone and many young people were left feeling unsupported. The YoungMinds report emphasised that any future provision must recognise the value of face to face interaction alongside virtual and digital forms of support.

Alongside issues with access to support, school closures also disrupted routines, which for many people of all ages with mental health problems can be particularly important as a coping mechanism. It has been suggested that being unable to attend school or university in person, or part-time jobs, can lead to a relapse in symptoms where young people relied on these routines. Refusing to undertake typical daily activities such as showering, getting out of bed and eating sufficient meals are some of the effects seen amongst these young people – all which can exacerbate feelings of depression or loneliness.

Role of families

Families have been found to play a vital part in helping young people who are suffering from mental health issues. This has only become more apparent with the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns, where young people would most likely be living with their family – whether that be parents, siblings or other relatives or caregivers. Lockdown guidelines that mandated staying at home would leave these young people spending more time with their families, and the closure of other services outwith the home, meant these young people’s households often became their main support system. The NHS follow-up survey found that both family connectedness and family functioning were associated with mental disorder, highlighting the importance of supporting families to enable them to support young people’s mental health.

The Local Government Association has recently published a guide on a “whole household approach” to young people’s mental health, stressing the importance of educating families on how to support their young people. This is highlighted as particularly important when they transition from child services to adult services as many teenagers and young people struggle with the lack of support offered when they are legally considered adults.

Another big issue affecting young people’s mental health is the use of social media. While there are many reported benefits of social media, particularly in relation to connecting with others, there are also growing concerns about its effects on wellbeing and the pandemic has undoubtedly exacerbated this. The NHS survey found that, in 2021, half (50.7%) of 11-16 year olds agreed that they spent more time on social media than they meant to and 16.7% using social media agreed that the number of likes, comments and shares they received had an impact on their mood. Those with a probable mental disorder were particularly likely to spend more time on social media than they intended, and girls seem to be more affected that boys.

The survey found that 21.1% of girls reported that likes, comments and shares from social media affected their mood, compared to 12.1% of boys. It also found that double the number of girls than boys spent more time on social media than they meant to. Other research has also highlighted the disproportionate impact on young girls. One study found that constant social media use predicted lower wellbeing in girls only and that these mental health harms may be due to a combination of cyberbullying, and a lack of sleep or exercise. This was not found in the teenage boys interviewed.

Solutions

When addressing mental health problems, it is clear that a ‘one size fits all’ approach does not work. As highlighted in the research, mental health problems can present themselves in a range of ways, and depend on a number of variables. People from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, or those with additional needs, often face more stigma and can find it more difficult to express their problems or access the correct support for their specific needs.

There have been suggestions for more targeted support for young people and the issues they may be facing, including more investment in schools and social services. Particularly for adolescents who are transitioning to adulthood, it is important to provide continuous support. As highlighted in the NHS Mental Health Survey, more adolescents and young adults (17 to 23 year olds) mentioned a decrease in their mental health than younger people (6 to 16 year olds). Children and Young People’s Mental Health Services (CYPMHS) notes that the transition from child to adult mental health services tends to begin around three to six months before the individual turns 18, although there can be flexibility. Perhaps even greater flexibility is required, particularly as we assess the damage left by the pandemic. It is argued that engaging adolescents in the provision of mental health services and a shift towards early intervention and prevention will also be important as we look to build new solutions.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also like to read:

Follow us on Twitter to see which topics are interesting our research team.

The future of public health: lessons from the pandemic

Posted on November 15, 2021 by holliewilson6

woman in white and black polka dot shirt with face mask

The Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has impacted all sectors of our society, but none more-so than public health services.

Last month, The Health Foundation hosted a webinar discussing the lessons from the pandemic and the future role of public health. The webinar drew on the findings from The Kings Fund report “Directors of public health and the COVID-19 pandemic”. It considered the issues facing public health as a result of COVID-19, and proposed steps to rebuild the healthcare sector and begin tackling the problems left as we slowly move out of the pandemic.

Lack of resources

One of the main themes of the webinar was raised by Shilpa Ross of The Kings Fund, who explained that a lack of resources and shortages in public health existed long before the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of longer term reductions to the public health grant meant that health services were not ready for the pandemic, nor for how long it has lasted. This has had a knock-on effect elsewhere in the NHS. A Care Quality Commission report noted that in July 2021, almost 300,000 people were waiting more than 52 weeks to begin hospital treatment.

On top of this, public health has faced staff shortages. Because so many healthcare services are “fishing in the same pond for recruits,” Shilpa explained that it has been especially hard to fill vacancies. In addition, many healthcare workers have experienced short and long-term effects of the virus, and the additional workloads have left many stressed and burnt out. The disruption to education could further delay the training and employment of potential new healthcare workers.

While the NHS has in some cases set up drop-in sessions for support and made efforts to provide even basic support, such as bottled water to aid hydration, these cannot fill the hole created by healthcare staff shortages.

Widening inequalities

Professor Kevin Fenton of Public Health England argued that “inequalities have defined the pandemic,” and would be the legacy of the last year and a half. A 2020 report by the Institute of Health Equity, commissioned by The Health Foundation, found that in England members of Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups (BAME) were more likely to be affected by COVID-19. The report attributed this partly to people in these groups living in more deprived areas, working in occupations with a higher exposure risk to the virus (such as healthcare or customer service roles), and in some cases living with multiple generations in their home (complicating self-isolation). The authors contended that while inequalities in social and economic conditions were present before the pandemic, they contributed to the unequal death toll resulting from COVID-19.

These inequalities have widened, partly due to the shortage of resources and staff. It has only grown more difficult to address the ever increasing numbers of people needing treatment, both urgent and non-urgent. As a result, the most vulnerable in society have fallen by the wayside.

Changing how public health works

The webinar also discussed how public health can move forward as the country slowly returns to a new form of normal. In addition to the restructuring of Public Health England, a new tax – the Health and Social Care Levy – will put an additional £12 billion into health and social care over the next three years. However, money alone is not enough – the webinar participants agreed that the infrastructures and inner workings of public health must evolve as we move towards a more efficient system of working.

Professor Fenton stressed the importance of engaging with local communities, and that the response towards the pandemic going forward must be grounded in their experiences, and what they need from both the public health system and also local authorities. He noted that while there may be pressure to go back to the way things operated before the pandemic, we must move forward: by understanding what worked and what didn’t, progress and better services can be achieved. Shilpa Ross added that a more targeted and tailored approach to health inequalities has provided more significant results in terms of vaccination and testing rates. This has in turn raised levels of trust within communities that public health teams may not have engaged with before the pandemic. All of this, however, takes up precious time.

Professor Jim McManus, Director of Public Health for Hertfordshire County Council, highlighted the importance of prevention not only for COVID-19 moving forward but other health conditions. He stated that they must be tackled at a place where they can stop others continuing to be affected, in addition to treating those who are currently being affected. Robin Tuddenham, Accountable Officer for NHS Calderdale Clinical Commissioning Group, agreed, and stressed that problems like homelessness and poverty should not be seen as separate from health but rather as important factors in the prevention of ill health.

Concluding thoughts

Highlighting the underlying issues and difficulties affecting public health before the pandemic is one step towards addressing them.

The webinar demonstrated that the pandemic has shifted how public health is perceived and valued. It has reminded all of us how important access to efficient, well-supported and high quality healthcare really is. Those working in decision-making roles in the healthcare sector are clearly looking towards the next steps for public health and how to give people the highest quality and most efficient care possible. With this in mind, the pandemic may have created a stepping stone towards a better healthcare system.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also like some of our previous posts:

Follow us on Twitter to see which topics are interesting our research officers and keep up to date with our latest blogs

Supporting universities could be key to economic and social recovery

Posted on July 26, 2021 by heathercameron25

*Image by Ian Dick via* *Creative Commons*

“Support for universities means support for businesses and jobs, for key workers, and for levelling up the UK’s towns and regions.” (Universities UK)

Universities have long been positively associated with economic growth, not only for the regional areas in which they are situated but also for neighbouring regions as a result of spillover effects. The total income of the UK university sector has been estimated at around £40 billion per year – 1.8% of national income.

Many universities are important anchors in their local areas, supporting community activity in various ways and working in collaboration with smaller businesses. And they have played a vital role in the response to the current pandemic through medical research, sharing of resources and community wellbeing efforts.

With widespread agreement over ‘building back better’ and ‘levelling up opportunities across all parts of the United Kingdom’, it is no surprise there have been calls to ensure investment in this sector is a central priority. In forecasting the potential impact of UK universities over the next five years, recent research from Universities UK suggests that a well-supported university sector could be key to the economic and social recovery from the pandemic.

Supporting people

The Universities UK report outlines the ways in which universities support people, including by providing a pipeline of key workers and enabling upskilling for new jobs. It is projected that by May 2026, more than 191,000 nurses, 84,000 medical specialists and 188,000 teachers will graduate from UK universities. And it is suggested that these are likely to be underestimates. If these forecasts are accurate, the potential for universities to help address the skills gaps and shortages that the UK faces is clear, particularly as nursing and teaching have featured on the hard-to-fill and skills shortage vacancies lists.

It is also projected that demand for higher level skills will continue rising into the late 2020s. In the shorter term, 79% of employers with more than 25 staff anticipate a need for upskilling in the next 12 months, rising to 84% for firms with over 100 staff. No region sees the need for upskilling fall below 60%. In addition to educating students, universities are responding to this need with training and upskilling programmes tailored to employers and the community. Forecasts for each of the UK nations include:

universities in Northern Ireland will deliver the equivalent of 410 years of professional development training and education courses to businesses and charities in the next five years (and 90 years’ worth in the next 12 months)
Scottish universities will provide 3,490 years of training by May 2026 (over 600 years’ worth in the next year)
Welsh universities will deliver the equivalent of nearly 4,800 years of upskilling in the next five years (over 880 years’ worth in the next 12 months)
universities in England will provide the equivalent of over 549 centuries (54,936 years) of training by May 2026, and 10,580 years’ worth in the next year alone

As has been argued, “part of the effect of universities on growth is mediated through an increased supply of human capital and greater innovation”.

Local economic impact

The local economic impact of universities is widely recognised. Universities have consistently attracted funding for local regeneration projects with significant economic and social impacts and the report forecasts that these will have a value of over £2.5 billion in local places across the UK over the next five years.

It is suggested that many of these projects will also attract additional funding from universities and businesses, resulting in even greater local impact.

Universities also have a direct impact on their local economies as large employers. It is estimated that 1.27% of all people in employment in the UK work for a university. Other recent analysis suggests that universities typically support up to one additional job in the immediate local economy for every person they directly employ.

The impact of universities on local procurement is also emphasised, highlighting the example of the Leeds Anchors Network, which is looking at opportunities to direct spending locally. The report suggests that if anchor institutions in Leeds shift 10% of their total spending to suppliers in the region this could be worth up to £196 million each year.

Collaboration and contributing to research

The report also considers the role of universities in partnering with business, including providing advice/training and enabling cutting edge research and innovation.

It is forecast that UK universities will be commissioned to provide over £11.6 billion of support and services to small enterprises, businesses and not-for-profits over the next five years, ranging from specialist advice, access to the latest facilities and equipment to develop innovative products, and conducting bespoke research projects. It is also expected that universities will attract national and international public funds to spend on collaborative research with businesses and non-academic organisations, estimated to be worth £21.7 billion over the next five years.

The report highlights that this research leads to impact in priority sectors. In the East Midlands, for example, over a third of competitive funding received by research organisations since 2014 was for clean growth and infrastructure projects with businesses, a higher proportion than any other region. In Yorkshire 85% of funding has been for manufacturing, materials and mobility projects, and 53% of funding in London has been in the area of ageing, health and nutrition.

Universities have also been shown to be effective in commercialising their research via spinouts, an area that has a great deal of potential to contribute to economic growth.

Despite all universities conducting cutting-edge research, there are regional disparities in research and innovation investment. And there has been historic underfunding in some regions which has led to inequalities in economic performance across the UK, putting the levelling up agenda at risk. The report therefore argues that “research and innovation policy needs to be designed alongside, and be closely aligned to, local economic development policy.”

Of course, the higher education sector hasn’t been immune to recent financial cuts and the expected losses for the sector are “highly uncertain” as highlighted by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

And the recent announcement of the 50% cut to university arts funding will come as a big blow to the already suffering creative industries sector. The decision, made in a bid to redirect spending to subjects considered a ‘strategic priority’ by the government such as medicine and STEM, is a concern if it is to have a detrimental impact on the arts industry talent pipeline.