Bridging the Gaps at UCL
James Paskins
Sarah Bell, Ben Croxford, Muki Haklay and Simon Julier
University College London
Final Event – 16th February 2011
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
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
Context of the programme
• UCL is a large multi-faculty department, with many
departments in central London.
• Lots of equipment, technicians and research
groups
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)
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
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
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?
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.”
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.”
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”
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.”
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
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
For more information and further details
about the funded work please visit
www.ucl.ac.uk/btg