Clear and collaborative REF 2029  

Helen Cross provides detail on the key updates and changes following the REF pause, explaining the decisions and what they mean for institutions. 

REF matters because it shapes how research is done in the UK. It influences careers, strategies and investment. But it is also a mirror reflecting what the sector values and where you are putting energy and resources. The UK needs research environments that are open, collaborative and resilient; organisations built on these principles attract talent, foster partnerships and deliver research that people can trust. Even in challenging times, these qualities are essential for long-term success. 

In a sector built on rigorous methods, robust evidence, and constructive debate, we shouldn’t be surprised that there are also strong views about the UK’s national research assessment framework! We have been working together as funding bodies, with the REF Team, to find a shared path forward. The stakes are high, and people care deeply about the state of UK research and innovation. Today, we’re announcing major updates to REF 2029, changes designed to bring clarity, reduce burden, and create space for what matters most: enabling excellent research that drives innovation, supports economic growth, and works to address the many challenges that the world is facing.  

Introducing Strategy, People and Research Environment 

REF 2029 introduces Strategy, People and Research Environment (SPRE), which will replace the previously named ‘People, Culture and Environment’. Is culture out of REF 2029? Absolutely not, but after reviewing the outcomes of the pilot, we’ve reframed this element to make our expectations clearer. Strategy, People and Research Environment puts the focus on creating the conditions that enable people to conduct world-class research. 

Having listened to the sector and considered the results of the pilot, we have settled on a weighting of 20% for SPRE, increasing the weighting for Contributions to Knowledge and Understanding (CKU) to 55%, with Engagement & Impact (E&I) remaining at 25%. The revised weightings reflect a clear commitment, shared by funding bodies and the sector, to fostering open, collaborative, and resilient research environments.  

SPRE is the element where institutions will be able to show how their strategies support people to create effective research environments that generate excellent research. Alongside new elements tested in the pilot, this section will incorporate familiar elements such as staff development, EDI, infrastructure, collaboration, and engagement.  

The SPRE guidance builds on the 2021 Environment component, and reflects evidence from the 18-month People, Culture and Environment Pilot. All of us in the funding bodies and the REF team extend our thanks to the 40 institutions and 170 panel members who took on the work to test this element and have together generated the evidence needed to implement it, available in the report also published today.

To give the sector a sense of future direction, we are confirming now that the weightings will be split 60:40 between Institutional-Level and Unit-Level statements, and the PCE Pilot report includes a set of indicators derived from the pilot that will be taken to the REF panels in the criteria phase. The panels will develop the final criteria and template – the same approach used in REF 2021. 

Disciplinary statements and representativeness  

We’re reducing burden by removing disciplinary statements for CKU and E&I. Instead, institutions will set out the submitting unit’s context, structure, and strategy within their SPRE statements. Here HEIs will also demonstrate how their submission is representative of the diversity of research within the unit.  

The sector told us clearly that, in a decoupled framework, guardrails were needed to support inclusive and equitable practice. In response, we’re reintroducing a recommended maximum of five outputs per researcher, consistent with REF 2021. This restores clarity and fairness, while reducing pressure on individuals by removing the minimum requirement. Institutions can exceed the maximum with an explanation in their SPRE statement, ensuring flexibility for different circumstances. We want to strike a balance: encouraging representativeness, supporting equity, and maintaining confidence in the process. 

Portability

In the Initial Decisions REF announced a move towards decoupling outputs from individuals, shifting the exercise’s focus squarely onto institutions. Head of REF Policy Jonathan Piotrowski explained that this move aims to minimise undue influence on careers and recognise the crucial role for institutions in supporting environments in which research is successful. 

 With every change to the REF, which serves an enormous and diverse population, the consequences are felt differently in different places. Jonathan’s team and the funding bodies have worked on this guidance extensively with the Main and Advisory panels and the community both before and since it was announced in summer. This allowed them to get into the gritty details of what’s needed to enable implementation whilst supporting research diversity. Given the context of heightened pressure – particularly in those disciplines most likely to produce longform and extended-process research outputs – we’ve developed an exception making those outputs portable for five years.  

Engagement and Impact  

We’re not making major changes to the guidance for this section from REF 2021, the template will remain very similar so that HEIs can begin using it confidently. However, high-quality impact case studies in REF 2021 often included meaningful engagement and so for REF 2029 the guidance encourages discussion of engagement strategies and responsible practices. We’re maintaining the consensus reached in the initial decisions that the 2* quality threshold will be removed and the minimum number of case studies required will be reduced to one. These changes enable institutions of all sizes to demonstrate meaningful engagement and real-world impact, including locally rooted case studies, supporting regional growth and widening participation in the research ecosystem. 

Selective submissions 

As Professor Dame Jessica Corner noted in her speech at the UUK conference, during the pause Research England had been exploring options for a multi-track route through REF for English universities but will not be pursuing that further. Instead, the funding bodies are working together on an optional flexibility which expands the REF 2021 policy for small units not to submit to REF should that align with institutional strategy. Full details on that will come later on. 

Timetable

We’re engaging constantly, and will continue to do this, as the panels take everything published today to produce their criteria. However, to make the final versions of the Guidance on Submissions and the Panel Criteria and Working Methods available as soon as possible, they will be published without additional formal consultation. This decision reflects the REF team’s close collaboration with the sector throughout the development process, and a shared commitment to reducing burden, maintaining momentum, and giving institutions maximum time with the guidance. You can see the updated timetable here. 

On we go

Together, these updates really demonstrate REF 2029 as a framework developed with and for the sector. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this process – your insight and collaboration have been vital in creating a REF that champions excellence and delivers real-world benefits.