SHAPE-ID

SHAPE-ID
Name	SHAPE-ID
Formation	2018
Type	Research project
Purpose	Interdisciplinary research integration
Region	Europe

SHAPE-ID

SHAPE-ID was a European research initiative that investigated integration between the arts, humanities, and social sciences with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Operating as a collaborative project, it brought together universities, research councils, museums, and cultural institutions to produce guidance, evidence synthesis, and policy recommendations. The project engaged stakeholders across academic, policy and cultural sectors to address barriers to interdisciplinary collaboration and to influence funding and institutional practices.

Overview

The project sought to clarify how scholarship in the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences could be systematically combined with research in the Natural Sciences, Engineering and Mathematics to address complex societal challenges. SHAPE-ID convened partners from higher education and research policy environments including organisations similar in remit to the European Commission, Horizon 2020 programmes, national research councils such as the Arts and Humanities Research Council, and major cultural institutions like the British Museum and the Tate Modern. Outputs included a synthesis report, methodological guidance, stakeholder workshops, and case studies intended for use by funders such as the Wellcome Trust and the Economic and Social Research Council.

Background and objectives

SHAPE-ID emerged amid ongoing debates in policy circles about the value of integrating distinct disciplinary traditions exemplified by institutions such as University of Oxford, University of Cambridge, University College London, and Sorbonne University. Its objectives echoed recommendations from reviews and reports from entities like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Research Council calling for transdisciplinary approaches to issues highlighted in international fora such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement. Specific aims included mapping barriers to interdisciplinary work, synthesising evidence on methods, and producing pragmatic guidance for funders, universities, and cultural partners including those akin to the Smithsonian Institution and the Museum of Modern Art.

Methodology and project activities

SHAPE-ID employed mixed methods, combining systematic reviews, stakeholder interviews, Delphi panels, workshops, and case study analysis. The methodological approach referenced established practices from projects funded by programmes like Horizon 2020 and drew on evaluation traditions present at organisations such as the National Science Foundation and the European Institute of Innovation and Technology. Activities included convening policy dialogues similar to those hosted by the Council of Europe and organising thematic workshops with participants from institutions such as the British Library, Max Planck Society, Leiden University, and the University of Copenhagen. The project also utilised peer review mechanisms common to the Royal Society and advisory input from bodies comparable to the Science and Technology Policy Institute.

Consortium and participants

The consortium incorporated universities, research centres, cultural institutions, and learned societies. Participants included representatives from higher education institutions analogous to King's College London, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, KU Leuven, and University of Bologna; research infrastructures similar to the European Research Council; and cultural partners modelled on the V&A Museum and the Rijksmuseum. Other consortium roles were filled by national agencies and foundations with profiles like the Gates Foundation and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Advisory contributions came from experts with affiliations comparable to Princeton University, Harvard University, Yale University, and policy bodies such as the European Commission DG Research and Innovation.

Key findings and outputs

Major outputs included a consolidated evidence synthesis report, practical guidelines for funders, and case study compendia illustrating interdisciplinary practice. Findings highlighted recurring barriers documented in scholarship from centres such as MIT and Stanford University: institutional reward structures, peer review misalignments, disparate epistemologies, and funding silos. The project recommended mechanisms similar to challenge-led calls used by Wellcome Trust and collaborative funding models akin to those piloted by the European Research Council. Outputs were disseminated through white papers, policy briefs, and workshops in venues analogous to European Parliament committee rooms and conferences hosted by groups like the International Science Council.

Impact and dissemination

SHAPE-ID influenced conversations among funders, universities, and cultural organisations across Europe and beyond. Its guidance informed funding programme designs in the spirit of initiatives from the European Commission and inspired follow-on dialogues at national research councils such as the Danish Council for Independent Research and the German Research Foundation. Dissemination channels included presentations at international conferences like the Society for Research in Higher Education and publications aimed at policy audiences including newsletters distributed by entities like the British Academy. Media coverage and engagement with stakeholders comparable to The Guardian and BBC Radio 4 amplified findings.

Criticisms and limitations

Critiques focused on the perennial challenges of operationalising interdisciplinary ideals: difficulties translating high-level recommendations into institutional change, limited longitudinal evidence of impact, and potential selection biases among participating partners drawn from established institutions such as Cambridge University Press contributors and elite museums. Observers compared these limitations to critiques levelled at prior initiatives involving bodies like the European Science Foundation and argued for more rigorous evaluation frameworks similar to those used by the National Institutes of Health and long-term funding commitments akin to those from the Horizon Europe programme.

Category:Research projects