RCUK  

The UK government's Department of Business, Innovation and Skills has published the report of the Triennial Review of the Research Councils.  The review concluded that the current structure remained appropriate, but makes recommendations on various changes that aim at improving the use of public funds, accountability and efficiency.  The report contains much interesting material

The UK Arts and Humanities Research Council Strategy 2013-18 is available.  Priorities and key themes are.../continued

Priorities

1. Research
1.1. To support the best ideas and projects emerging from researchers.
1.2. To enable larger projects, including facilitating collaboration and interdisciplinarity.
1.3. To bring scholars together to address new research questions and agendas in themes and strategic initiatives.
1.4. To develop both the assessment and formative role of peer reviewers to ensure that funding is directed toward research of the highest quality and greatest ambition.

2. People
2.1. To develop postgraduate support to provide the strongest possible foundation for capacity, quality and creativity.
2.2. To support researchers through skills development, networks and projects.
2.3. To promote intellectual leadership through fellowships and large and thematic projects.
2.4. To develop our engagement with the research community through the measures highlighted under ‘AHRC Commons’ and, in tandem, to enhance the role of the AHRC Peer Review College as outlined below.

3. Partnerships and Knowledge Exchange
3.1. To extend our contribution to the UK’s creative economy through Knowledge Exchange and other means.
3.2. To deepen engagement with public, private and third sector partners to enlarge the contribution to the arts, public engagement and policy formation nationally and internationally.

Themes

Themes were developed by AHRC in 2009-10 and continue into the new strategic period:

• Care for the Future affords an opportunity for researchers to generate new understanding of the relationship between the past and the future and how we transmit and question our heritage.
• Digital Transformations investigates the potential of digital technologies to transform research in the arts and humanities. It addresses crucial topics such as intellectual property, cultural memory and identity, and communication and creativity in the digital age.
• Science in Culture explores cross-disciplinary dialogues in the relationship between sciences and the arts and humanities.
• Translating Cultures explores understanding and communication across cultures, looking at the role of translation, in its broadest sense, in the transmission of languages, values, beliefs, histories and narratives.
• Connected Communities is a cross-Council programme led by the AHRC working with EPSRC, ESRC, MRC and NERC and a range of external partners. Arts and humanities researchers lead on areas related to creativity, sustainability, historical experiences and the cultural and belief frameworks through which communities self-identify and interact.

The UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) has launched a consultation on the future of some of its research centres - British Geological Survey (BGS), the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH), the National Oceanography Centre (NOC) and the National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS)  - asking whether they should be given independent status.  Deadline for comment 30 August 2013

Interesting post on the Nature News Blog on the first meeting of a Global Science Council - what it may become is unclear, but discussion of merit [peer] review.  A number of principles were identified, as follows:

• Expert Assessment -- Collectively, reviewers should have the appropriate knowledge and expertise to assess the proposal both at the level of the broad context of the research field(s) to which it contributes and with respect to the specific objectives and methodology. Reviewers should be selected according to clear criteria.
• Transparency -- Decisions must be based on clearly described rules, procedures and evaluation criteria that are published a priori. Applicants should receive appropriate feedback on the evaluation of their proposal.
• Impartiality -- Proposals must be assessed fairly and on their merit. Conflicts of interest must be declared and managed according to defined, published processes.
• Appropriateness -- The review process should be consistent with the nature of the call, with the research area addressed, and in proportion to the investment and complexity of the work.
• Confidentiality -- All proposals, including related data, intellectual property and other documents, must be treated in confidence by reviewers and organizations involved in the review process.
• Integrity and Ethical Consideration -- Ethics and integrity are paramount to the review process 

Report out from the Research Information Network/JISC on Data Centres: their use, value and impact. Interesting, but a relatively limited view - little on international context or potential, or use internationally.  Would also be interesting to think about career incentives for scientists to contribute and curate, and the potential impacts of RCUK/EPSRC emerging requirements for data preservation and access.