Bridging the Gaps at UCL

1. Bridging the Gaps at UCL James Paskins Sarah Bell, Ben Croxford, MukiHaklay and Simon Julier University College London Final Event – 16th February 2011

2. Aims of the Bridging the Gaps Programme • Introduced by the EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council) • Recognition that some problems benefit from a being approached by different disciplines • Funding allows a university to explore ways of making interdisciplinary research work

3. The need for interdisciplinary working • “The world has its problems, but universities have departments” • Departments have their advantages • Concentration of expertise • Shared worldview • Real-world problems often require input from more than one discipline • Tension between efficiency and freedom

4. Context of the programme • UCL is a large multi-faculty department, with many departments in central London. • Lots of equipment, technicians and research groups

5. About Bridging the Gaps at UCL • Research has to involve sustainable urban spaces • Collaborators must come from at least two different departments at UCL • At least cross-departmental if not cross-disciplinary • Any UCL department can be involved • Focus on early career researchers(activities cannot be led by a Professor)

6. Range of Bridging the Gaps activities • Open Programme – small initial funding for ideas • Seminar Funding • Visiting Scholar Award • Staff Exchange • MSc Competition – co supervision of MSc • Sandpit Funding – nanotech and sensors • Escalator Funding – for previous participants • Grant Writing Support • Champion’s Events – Network of representatives

8. Funding from Bridging the Gaps • Bridging the gaps has awarded over £225,000 in funding • Applications were submitted from 26 departments or centres in 6 faculties • Funding was given to 51 collaborations between departments • Bridging the Gaps has given 63 academics the chance to test their ideas and new research partnerships

9. A wide range of activities have been funded • Natural ventilation for greener and healthier buildings • Questioning the sustainability of post-industrial urban landscapes • Children, Well-being and Disability: Re-visiting India • Community Mapping in Hackney: Community use and appropriation of Hackney Marsh, London • Climate and Uncertainty Symposium • Duracoat: Using Nanoscience to protect wood • What's my energy footprint?

10. Requirement for expertise or equipment “Energy efficiency is a function of many factors not studied in computer science departments” “it allowed us to bring in ... staff from other departments [with] skills that we would have been unable to provide ourselves” “access to laboratory… to use specialist equipment” “the equipment in the two groups is shared and the researcher benefits from it” “Collaboration across disciplines and departments is most of the time very fruitful as it provides you with an opportunity to complement skills and knowledge.”

11. Further benefits from collaboration • Developing skills “I have gained ... understanding outside my background” “I  also learned how to efficiently prepare for a large funding from my partner” “I liked the straightforward way physical scientists approach things” • Reaching a wider audience “It is going to take some of my research into different areas and to a bigger audience, hopefully it will help make the research successful in that we can start to tackle some of the huge challenges we are trying to address.”

12. About the future: Continuing collaboration “[We] now share a PhD student” “we will push this [collaboration] in the grant proposals” “I think EPSRC funding is the next logical step.” “We plan to apply for a larger fund such as FP-7 or EPSRC” “the ideas generated during this project has helped me to think about a further proposal which I am currently outlining and will be submitted to the BBSRC”

13. Is cross-disciplinary research worth it? “Without a doubt” “Yes, definitely” “Possibly, depending on the time spent transferring knowledge and the benefits the cross-disciplinary collaboration” “if the problem is of a truly cross-disciplinary nature ... then the benefits will definitely outweigh the complexities.” “very subjective [it is] about one's professional objectives and the things that make one's job worth doing.”

14. Conclusions • Participants open to cross-disciplinary working • Cross-disciplinary research is seen as the future, or the present, of research • Lack of funding seen as a barrier to novel collaboration • Time pressure and complexity also act as barriers • Frustration at discipline based assessment • Given the right problem, collaboration is seen as worth the difficulties involved

15. Conclusions • Cross-disciplinary working can fill a skills gap and provide access to useful equipment • It can also develop the participant’s skills and expose them to a wider audience • Small amounts of funding can be enough to initiate a collaboration and begin work on an idea • In some cases leading to larger grant applications • Information about resources and facilities and potential partners is also valuable

16. For more information and further details about the funded work please visit www.ucl.ac.uk/btg