Impact case study database

4.1. Pathway to impact

Through a long-term consistent strategy of engagement with communities of policy making, economic forecasting and institutional design, Professor Leith and colleagues forged three principles from the underpinning research to shape policy and practice. First, the Scottish Fiscal Commission should be fully independent from the Scottish Government. Second, it should support fiscal sustainability. Third, the SFC, and its operating Fiscal Framework, should enable policy makers to respond flexibly to shocks. This third principle is the key insight from the underpinning research: the point of fiscal councils is to ensure unbiased fiscal forecasting and enhanced credibility in support of policies which mimic what we believe to be optimal policy. This is in contrast to the non-credible fiscal rules which have been adopted and, just as quickly, abandoned in the past.

4.2. The creation and evolution of the Scottish Fiscal Commission

Ahead of the SFC being established, Scottish Government forecasts and their underlying methodologies were not independently scrutinised. Initially, that scrutiny was the central role for the SFC when it was created as a non-statutory body in June 2014. However, following the independence referendum of the same year, additional borrowing and fiscal powers were granted to Scotland. As a result, the remit of the SFC expanded and its status changed from non-statutory to statutory body in 2017. This change was acknowledged by the SFC becoming a member of the OECD’s group of recognised Independent Fiscal Institutions (IFIs). At this point the SFC assumed the role of official forecaster for Scotland. This marked a step change in Scotland’s economic policymaking.

The initial link in the chain of impact was the involvement of Professor Leith in calls for a fiscal council to be created for Scotland. The body of research explicitly underpinned Leith’s written evidence [5A] to the Finance Committee of the Scottish Parliament, which was relied on in supporting their recommendation that the SFC be created (confirmed by the official report and transcript of Leith’s oral evidence **[5B]**). For example, the report relies on Leith’s definition of the role of the SFC, ‘The objective of an independent fiscal body is summarised by Professor Campbell Leith as being “…to allow for short-run flexibility in a way that adherence to fiscal rules may not allow, but to ensure that this does not jeopardise long-run fiscal solvency.”’

Upon the formation of the SFC, Leith was then invited by the Finance Minister to be one of three founding members (Commissioners) of the SFC (confirmed by the Committee’s assessment of Leith’s nomination **[5C]**). The fact that Leith was appointed as a founding Commissioner provides evidence that his vision for the role of the SFC was accepted by the Scottish Government (confirmed by final report and transcript of oral evidence **[5D]**). Leith was then joined by UofG colleague, Professor Nolan, who became a Commissioner in 2016, following the resignation of one of the original Commissioners.

4.3. Informing the Scottish Government’s negotiating position

Professor Leith was also involved in providing evidence to the Scottish Parliament on the appropriate form of fiscal rules for Scotland, which informed their negotiating position in agreeing the Fiscal Framework governing the implementation of further fiscal powers following the Scottish independence referendum of 2014. This written evidence again cited and drew on the published research of the UofG researchers named above [5E]. The final report of the Finance Committee relied heavily on this evidence in formulating its recommendations, which were broadly accepted by the Scottish Government as its bargaining position (confirmed by official report **[5F]**).

For example, the report cites Leith’s view on fiscal rules, “Professor Campbell Leith suggests that ‘fiscal targets should facilitate the use of debt as a shock absorber.’ If the ‘borrowing limit is too low, the effective use of government debt as a shock absorber will be compromised.’ These fiscal targets ‘should apply over a sufficiently long time horizon to allow gradual adjustment to the target and the time horizon should be rolling. The targets should also be set in terms of deficits and not debt’” [5E]. This was used to justify the Committee’s recommendations, “The Committee’s view is that it is clear that the level of borrowing powers for current spending will need to be significantly increased and should be commensurate with the risks faced by the Scottish Government post–Smith. The Committee notes that the precise types of risk Scotland may be exposed to will be determined by the block grant adjustment method which is intended to insulate Scotland from UK-wide economic shocks. At the same time there will also be a Scotland-specific cyclical risk and the Scottish Government will require substantial new borrowing powers to manage this volatility” [5F].

4.4. The design and ongoing development of Scotland’s fiscal framework

In light of the further devolution of fiscal powers, the provision of evidence on how the SFC’s remit should evolve was an ongoing aspect of Professor Leith and Nolan’s roles as Commissioners. This was done formally in both closed and open sessions of Committees of the Scottish Parliament, particularly the Finance Committee (confirmed by official reports **[5G][5H][5I]**). However, Commissioners were also regularly briefed on, and able to influence, the drafting of the legislation which formalised the SFC’s status and remit as a statutory body. Leith and Nolan were also heavily involved in designing the structure of the SFC, as well as its way of operating, as it expanded to a staff of approximately 20 people. Moreover, Professor Nolan represented the SFC on a parliamentary committee, The Budget Progress Review Group, which sought to change the budget process to enhance both the Scottish Parliament and SFC’s scrutiny of the Scottish Budget following the creation of the SFC (confirmed by official report **[5J]**).

The initial evidence Professor Leith gave to the Scottish Parliament made the general case for fiscal councils, but also included specific recommendations for the Scottish context (confirmed by written evidence **[5A]**). In particular, it stressed the need to ensure cooperation rather than conflict with the UK sister body, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). For example from the Finance Committee’s Report [5B], “The matter of the relationship between an independent fiscal body and the OBR was commented on by Professor Leith […] an independent Scottish Fiscal Council could enhance the policy making process by making independent forecasts of variables of sole interest to Scotland. For other items which impact on both Scotland and the rest of the UK, a formal working relationship between the Scottish Fiscal Council and the OBR which aims to produce a single consensus forecast would facilitate the gains from cooperation, without undermining the credibility of either body.” To this end, upon being appointed as a Commissioner, Professor Leith promoted the holding of regular meetings with the OBR to ensure there was a shared reconciliation of their respective forecasts, thereby preventing any differences being exploited politically. Thereafter, Professors Leith and Nolan were in regular contact with the OBR.

4.5. Beneficiaries

The establishment of the SFC has reduced suspicion of politically influenced forecasts, generated trust in its work and enhanced fiscal transparency. An OECD review of the SFC (2019) confirms that, “[it] has been successful in establishing constructive relationships with key stakeholders and has quickly developed a reputation for delivering independent and credible forecasts. The SFC’s independence is underpinned by strong enabling legislation … The SFC has become a voice of authority, and is credited with enriching the fiscal policy debate in Scotland. It has significant engagement with the Scottish Parliament and receives broad media coverage” [5K]. Chapter 5 of the OECD review further evidences the positive impact of the SFC. As Scotland’s official forecaster, it has a direct influence on the parameters of the annual budget and informs MSPs (who between April 2017 and May 2019 made 62 references to the SFC in parliamentary questions). In addition, the OECD found that through its reports, website, social media, press conferences and regular interactions with journalists, the SFC has established significant media impact [5K]. Thus, the ultimate beneficiaries of this impact are the people of Scotland and the evolving devolved governance of the country.

4.1. Baseline context

Exemptions from payment for dental and ophthalmic treatments cost NHS Scotland approximately GBP75 million per annum. Approximately 1.4 million exemption claims are made each year from approximately 6 million total patient contacts. NHS Counter Fraud Services have historically checked 50,000 claims per annum; the estimated fraud/error rate is around 14% with annual losses to NHS Scotland of approximately GBP10 million.

4.2. Pathways to impact

In order to tackle this issue, in June 2015 and February 2016 initial knowledge exchange workshops were held between the UofG, NHS Scotland, the Glasgow Centre for Population Health, Scottish Government and the Royal Society of Edinburgh. These workshops were followed by face-to-face meetings between Ghosal and a Senior Counter Fraud Specialist from NHS Scotland. Ghosal was subsequently invited to present his research at the NHS Scotland Counter Fraud Network Meeting in November 2016 (confirmed by invitation **[5A]**). At this presentation, Ghosal set out how his research on self-fulfilling frames could be used to influence behaviour in lieu of threatening a penalty charge or fine (confirmed by slides **[5B]**). This led Senior NHS managers to invite Ghosal to collaborate in the co-design of a new intervention for incorrectly claimed exemptions for payment of charges for dental and ophthalmic treatments.

4.3. Co-designing an intervention

NHS Scotland’s ‘business as usual’ process for incorrectly claimed exemptions previously involved a letter initiating a penalty charge after 30 days of non-payment. In contrast, the intervention involved eligibility checks being undertaken on all claims received within a period of 4-8 weeks, followed by a written request for voluntary payment of the charges without the threat of a penalty charge. The written request took one of three different formats, corresponding to three co-designed frames (which were tested on 6,000 patients). The sample was split into equal cohorts with letters adopting one of three frames: (i) a ‘social welfare’ frame, which emphasised that wrongly claimed exemptions can divert money from NHS patients; (ii) a ‘neutral’ frame; or (iii) a ‘consequences’ frame, which stated that claimants’ future treatment activities may be monitored. In each letter, patients were asked to pay for their treatment, and in future to ensure that they were entitled to claim exemptions before doing so.

Ghosal, Koutmeridis and the Senior Counter Fraud Specialist from NHS Scotland then drafted an NHS document seeking approval for the initiative. The document [5C], which directly cites the underpinning research [3.1, 3.4], demonstrated how NHS Scotland could use the empirical data collected to take the initiative forward in the long term. The approval and subsequent implementation of this initiative by NHS Scotland was the first evidence of actual change, marking the first time that NHS Scotland Counter Fraud Services had incorporated insights from behavioural economics in their activities. This was supported by NHS Scotland funding of GBP60,000.00 to back the collaboration in 2017 (confirmed by email **[5D]**) .

4.4. Increased financial recoveries

The Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, confirms that, ‘the support that Professor Sayantan Ghosal provides to NHS Scotland has a real, positive financial impact.’ (statement **[5E]**). From September 2017 onwards, batches of letters utilising the new frames were sent out at weekly intervals. In the first seven weeks, 7,800 letters were issued and GBP109,330.00 was collected as a result (confirmed by data **[5F]**). This was achieved without the threat of a penalty charge, using letters incorporating the three co-designed frames. The Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, further underlined the economic impact of the initiative: *“In general terms we are very happy to be receiving over £100,000 per month, which is almost five times our previous monthly income.” In a subsequent email, the Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, confirmed that cash recoveries from patients found to have incorrectly claimed exemption were GBP935,841.71 for 2017/18 (including the six-month intervention). The comparative figure was GBP355,301.95 for 2016/17 (pre intervention), which represents an increase of GBP580,539.76 (confirmed by collated emails **[5G]**)

4.5. Changes to NHS Scotland’s practice and culture

In March 2018, NHS Scotland’s business as usual letter was modified to incorporate the ‘social welfare’ frame as standard. Although all of the co-designed frames worked successfully, the ‘social welfare’ frame was selected over the ‘consequences’ frame as it was perceived more positively:

‘Most people pay for their dental treatment unless they qualify for exemption. Only a minority in your area wrongly claim exemption, diverting money away from patients like you who rely on NHS healthcare. Make sure you are not one of them.’ [5H]

The incorporation of the ‘social welfare’ frame into the business as usual letter entails that improved cash recoveries will continue in the long term. As a direct result, this pioneering collaboration was awarded an NHS Scotland Excellence in Innovation and Efficiency Award in 2019. NHS Scotland Counter Fraud Services was also named Team of the Year at the UK Government Counter Fraud Awards that same year (confirmed by collated evidence **[5I]**).

The Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, also confirms changes to institutional culture based upon the collaboration with UofG researchers: ‘We have been coached by Sayantan [Ghosal] to develop a research culture where the impact of our fraud prevention interventions can be measured, repeated and the results withstand scrutiny. The importance of controlling variables is now commonly understood within my team’. He added: ‘following on from this campaign we worked with our IT supplier to create an editable field in our ‘business as usual’ letter. We hope to start soon with experiments to test the effectiveness of different message frames to engage more people with our normal statutory recovery process without resorting to fines, penalties and higher cost of administration.’ (statement **[5E]**).

The adoption of these experimental methods by NHS Scotland Counter Fraud Services has underpinned subsequent initiatives and procedural changes. For instance, based upon consultation with Ghosal and Koutmeridis, an automated telephone payment line was introduced in order to remove the ‘process friction’ that occurs in debt-recovery telephone conversations. For these reasons, ongoing financial recoveries cannot solely be attributed to the co-designed intervention. What can be confirmed is that, from July 2019 to March 2020, 17,245 letters incorporating the ‘social welfare’ frame were sent out (prior to activities being suspended by COVID-19). In terms of financial recoveries, the available data covers the period from September 2019 to December 2019, in which the total recoveries were approximately GBP330,000.00 (which would equate to approximately GBP990,000.00 per annum). These figures suggest that increased financial recoveries are sustained at a similar level to the original intervention period (confirmed by collated evidence **[5J]**).

4.6. Spinout interventions

Based upon the principles of this initiative, Ghosal and Koutmeridis have embarked on new collaborations with NHS Scotland Counter Fraud Services. Firstly, Operation Lugano designed a frame to be embedded in a letter to be sent to ophthalmologists to check patient eligibility when exemption claims are first made. From December 2019 to February 2020, a three-month pilot intervention recorded 516 fewer claims (in comparison with the same time period the previous year) with a value of GBP30,671.00 (confirmed by data **[5K]**). The Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, confirms that, ‘early indications suggest that savings have been realised and when annualised create a cost savings ratio of more than 1:1000 for the £1000 cost of postage.’ (confirmed by statement **[5E]**).

The second initiative, Operation Como (originally due to begin in April 2020 but delayed by COVID-19) was set to adopt the same principles by sending 1,000 letters to dental practices, where spending is significantly higher than ophthalmic practices. Predictions based upon previous interventions suggested that this could prevent losses of up to GBP100,000 per annum (confirmed by statement **[5E]**). The Senior Counter Fraud Specialist, NHS Scotland, adds that, ‘the next phase of our activities in tackling this area of loss is to investigate whether it is possible to increase the options to include something like a small loan from a credit union. This would be a really worthwhile area to explore and the knowledge that Sayantan [Ghosal] brings to this subject will be crucial in finding the best solution.’

UofG research has, therefore, not only contributed to our understanding of an aspect of behavioural economics through a substantial empirical application, but has impacted on policy and practice by devising an intervention based upon its theories. This has realised significant financial recoveries for NHS Scotland, which can now be redistributed to support patient care.

4.1. Pathways to Impact

The origins of the impact-generating publication [3.1] lay in Azémar’s longstanding interest in both corporate tax incidence and the responses of multinational corporations to country tax regimes. Azémar, then a UofG lecturer, took up a visiting researcher position at Columbia University in 2011, where she met Glenn Hubbard, then Dean of its Graduate Business School. They shared a research interest in the incidence of corporate taxes, and Azémar proposed a collaborative study to produce new empirical evidence on the shifting to labour of corporate taxes in a range of countries, including the United States. This would potentially impact on US taxation policy. Hubbard had extensive experience in the US Federal Government as Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Department of the Treasury (1991–1993) and then Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers (2001–2003). His prominence in policy circles provided realistic pathways to impact on US fiscal decisions and their four-year collaboration resulted in the 2015 article [3.1].

4.2. Shifting the corporate tax debate

Until 2008, the US Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Analysis (OTA) allocated the full incidence of corporate tax to capital (Cronin, Lin, Power and Cooper, 2012). This was guided by the early theoretical work on closed economies showing that corporate income tax is not shifted to labour but is fully borne by capital. Despite later work on open economies that has concluded that domestic labour bears a sizeable share of a corporate income tax increase, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), guided by the work of Jane Gravelle (Senior Specialist for Economic Policy in the Congressional Research Service), has continued to assign most of the incidence to capital (Gravelle, ‘Corporate Tax Reform: Issues for Congress’, Congressional Research Service, 2017).

More recently, the US Government began to cite the Azémar and Hubbard findings to justify a review of its assignment, and shift the incidence toward labour. For example, in August 2017, Steven Mnuchin, the then US Secretary of the Treasury, cited their research in arguing that the corporate tax rate is paid by workers. An article by Richard Rubin, which appeared in The Wall Street Journal on 8 August 2017, stated: ‘The Treasury Department under Mr Mnuchin pointed to a 2015 study by Céline Azémar and Glenn Hubbard that estimated that a $1 increase in corporate taxes leads to a 60 cent decline in wages, suggesting a tight link between the two, with labor bearing about 60% of the corporate tax burden’ [5A] and concluded that a decrease of the U.S. corporate tax rate would benefit American households. He declared that such a reform is ‘ about putting money back in the American worker’s pocket’ and ‘creating jobs’. [5A]

In September 2017, as Congress considered tax reform, Gravelle published a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report entitled ‘Corporate Tax Reform: Issues for Congress’. Particular attention was given to research such as that of Azémar and Hubbard, which concerns behavioural responses and their implications for revenue and distribution. However, Gravelle’s policy recommendation was to continue to assign most of the incidence to capital. Indeed, her report considers that a wage bargaining framework, as used in Azémar and Hubbard’s research, may not be appropriate for the United States because the amount of labour income due to rent sharing is ‘small’ in that country [5B]. Nevertheless, influential academic research on rent sharing shows that it can in fact be substantial in the United States (Blanchflower, Oswald and Sanfey, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1996).

In October 2017, Azémar and Hubbard’s research was cited by the Council of Economic Advisers of the Executive Office of the US President in the report The growth effect of corporate tax reform and implications for wages [5C]. It states that:

‘Results from Azémar and Hubbard (2015) also utilize cross-country changes in the corporate tax rates of OECD countries to measure the effects of corporate tax rate changes for worker wages. The paper measures changes in worker wages with and without controls for changes in value-added. The results imply a semi-elasticity of worker wages with respect to the corporate tax rate of -0.43 (an elasticity of -0.17 in the U.S. case), of which approximately three-fourths is related to the indirect channel and one-fourth to the direct channel’ [5C] (pp.22–23).

The elasticity of -0.43 is the average elasticity estimated with overall incidence for 13 OECD countries by Azémar and Hubbard (2015, Table 4, Column 2). The elasticity of -0.17 in the U.S. case is a calculation made by the Council of Economic Advisors based on the average elasticity of -0.43 of Azémar and Hubbard (2015) and their overall results showing that domestic labour’s burden increases with the degree of capital openness (relatively high for the U.S.), with the density of unions (relatively low for the U.S.), and decreases with the size of an economy in the world capital market and in the world market supply (both relatively high for the U.S.).

Using this elasticity, in a discussion of the academic literature to justify the adoption of the pro-growth ‘Tax Cuts and Jobs Act’, the Council of Economic Advisers calculates that a decrease of the US tax rate could lead in the long run to an increase in real American wages of approximately USD4,000. The report states:

‘Estimates from Azémar and Hubbard (2015) are closer to $4,000 […] As a whole, we view these estimates as indicating a U.S. Federal corporate rate reduction from 35 to 20 is likely to result in wage increases for U.S. households of $4,000 or more’ [5C] (p.25).

4.3. Impact on corporate tax reform

In December 2017, ‘The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act’ passed into law, with most of the changes coming into effect on 1 January 2018. One of the major changes (the first since 1993) is a reduction of the tax rate for businesses, with the US Federal corporate income tax rate going down from 35% to 21%.

In February 2018, the Economic Report of the President [5D] was published, citing Azémar and Hubbard’s research among a body of academic literature on the effects of taxing corporate income. This sought to demonstrate that the empirical evidence indicates the responsiveness of wages to changes in corporate taxation. Combined with the annual report of the Council of Economic Advisers [5C], the Economic Report of the President [5D] shows that the estimates from Azémar and Hubbard’s study and the link they establish between corporate tax rates and wages was a key justification for a decrease in the US corporate tax rate.

4.4. Impact on Incomes

The first direct beneficiaries of the US tax reforms are corporations which benefit from a lower corporate tax rate. The second indirect beneficiaries are expected to be American workers via an increase in their wages. Workers in the United States have experienced long-term real wage stagnation and a persistent lack of economic progress. Given the link between corporate tax rates and wages, as found in Azémar and Hubbard’s research [3.1], the US pro-growth tax plan ‘Tax Cuts and Jobs Act 2017’ would lead to a rise in incomes for American workers, especially low-skilled ones whose inability to move jobs renders them vulnerable to the corporate tax burden.

Azémar and Hubbard’s research [3.1] has thus impacted on this landmark US tax reform, the most significant since 1986, in two ways. Its primary impact has been on the recognition in US tax policy of academic research findings according to which corporate tax is not solely borne by capital. This countered the continuing Congressional Research Service view that incidence falls mostly on capital.

Although the effects of this reform have yet to work through and are more difficult to disentangle as a result of COVID-19 and subsequent economic support measures, there has been a secondary impact on decisions within corporations about the distribution of the product between capital, labour and government. This is an issue which the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project is also addressing.

4.1. Pathway to impact

Following the publication of the monograph Reclaiming Public Ownership: Making Space for Economic Democracy [3.1], Cumbers’ research came to the attention of various think tanks and political parties within the UK and the United States. Through these channels, the work has shaped public and political debate in arguing for new democratic and diverse forms of public ownership as a viable alternative to both privatisation and top-down nationalisation, as outlined below:

4.2. Shaping policy and debate within Scotland

Based upon the underpinning research, Cumbers was invited to co-write a report as lead author for the Jimmy Reid Foundation to inform Scottish public policy debates on energy policy. The report [5A], published in September 2013, was launched at the Scottish Green’s annual conference and endorsed as Party policy (confirmed by article **[5B]**). Although the Scottish Minister for Energy refused to endorse the proposals at the time, the Scottish Government subsequently committed to setting up a public energy company. Cumbers’ contribution to the public consultation exercise was cited on three occasions by the resultant Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee Report (2018) [5C].

4.3. Underpinning UK Labour Party policy

Cumbers’ research has, ‘driven the policy development agenda on public ownership within the Labour Party’ (confirmed in statement **[5D]**) from the former Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, 2015–20). The late Michael Meacher, former Environment Minister, commissioned Cumbers to write a chapter on democratic public ownership for his book, What the Three Main Parties are Not Telling You (2015) . Cumbers’ research subsequently came to the attention of the Labour Party’s Shadow Economics team. This resulted in an invitation to present to the Party’s State of the Economy conference in May 2016. He was then invited to join the Party’s working group on cooperatives and alternative forms of ownership. Cumbers then co-wrote the Shadow Cabinet’s policy paper on Alternative Models of Ownership (2017) [5E], in which the section on national ownership draws directly upon his research.

In February 2018, Cumbers gave the plenary address at Labour’s Alternative Models of Ownership Conference. In September of that year, he was commissioned to write a consultation paper [5F] on democratic public ownership (with Thomas Hanna of The Democracy Collaborative) for the Labour Party’s internal policy review. This work—particularly the two policy papers—was pivotal in developing Labour Party policy (as confirmed by statement **[5D]**). The former Shadow Chancellor added: ‘the suggestions and contributions made in these papers will hopefully form the basis of a governance model—though diverse in how it is deployed in specific areas—for a new generation of publicly owned utilities under the next Labour government’.

4.4. Changing the terms of national debate

Cumbers’ research cuts across the traditional lines of debate by critiquing both privatisation and earlier forms of top-down public ownership. His work has received national media coverage through agenda-setting journalists advocating an alternative economic approach (e.g. Seamus Milne and Aditya Chakrabortty). In June 2019, the then Shadow Chancellor shared Cumbers & Hanna’s exciting contribution to Labour’s consultation on public ownership with over 206,500 Twitter followers. On 5 December 2019, a week before the UK’s General Election, Cumbers was invited to outline Labour’s bold new nationalisation plans to Business Editor Simon Jack on the BBC’s flagship News at Ten (a programme watched by an average of 3.2 million viewers per day in 2019). An associated article was also published on the BBC news website, a platform that commands global reach (confirmed by collated media activity **[5G]**).

Cumbers’ innovative approach to public ownership has stimulated engagement from all sides of the debate. Further work has been commissioned by think tanks including, e.g. policy papers for the trade union-funded Centre for Labour and Social Studies ( 2014 & 2017); a solicited piece for the Institute for Public Policy Research’s Juncture magazine ( 2016); and an article for the Fabian Society ( 2017) [5G]. The research has also engaged divergent audiences and directly informed debate within the energy sector. For instance, in November 2018, Cumbers delivered a well-received lecture hosted by free-market think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs. Delegates included over 120 directors and senior managers of private utility companies and energy industry regulators (confirmed by delegate list **[5H]**). This breadth of engagement activity led the former Shadow Chancellor to credit Cumbers’ research as helping, ‘ define the policy debate terrain of the present and the political-economic landscape of the future’ (confirmed by statement **[5D]**).

4.5. International policy influence

From 2015 onwards, Cumbers’ research advanced the strategic thinking and external reputation of the Washington-based think tank The Democracy Collaborative (TDC). In 2017, TDC commissioned him to write a paper as part of the organisation’s ‘Next System Project’, outlining a model of a publicly-owned democratic economy. Cumbers was subsequently invited to present his work in October that year to the Democratic Party’s Progressive Caucus (the third largest caucus in the United States Congress). TDC’s Director of Research confirms that, as a result of Cumbers’ presentation, and the connections made, ‘TDC has been able to significantly advance its policy work at federal level’ (confirmed by statement **[5I]**). TDC’s bold proposals on expanding democratic ownership were subsequently endorsed by Bernie Sanders during his 2020 presidential campaign (confirmed by article **[5J]**).

Cumbers’ research has enabled TDC to forge stronger links with grassroots organisations and activist groups across the US. In 2017, he recorded an episode of their Next System Project podcast (Ep. 11: The Transformative Potential of Public Ownership (W/ Andrew Cumbers), which has been downloaded over 2500 times (by comparison 80% of their podcasts average around 400 downloads). In 2019, he was commissioned to write a second paper on Constructing the Democratic Public Enterprise and invited to give two presentations in April that year, which were attended by hundreds of influential activists, academics and policymakers (including the then Deputy Mayor of New York). These events helped TDC develop links with local activist groups (e.g. by underpinning discussions with local activists and public officials in New York). Statement [5I] confirms this extensive list of activity and adds that: ‘Professor Cumbers’ research has significantly influenced the work of TDC and has been utilized to catalyze a rapidly developing public conversation about what a radically different system capable of delivering superior social, economic and ecological outcomes might look like.’

The international reach of the research is further exemplified by an invitation to Cumbers in 2017 to give a plenary lecture on the principles of democratic public ownership at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the largest Canadian progressive think tank (confirmed by invitation **[5K]**). Cumbers is currently working with Public Services International (the global union federation for public services) and the Amsterdam-based Transnational Institute to help develop their policies around local forms of democratic public ownership. His GBP1.5 million European Research Council Advanced Grant (2019–2023) involves a collaboration with Public Services International (which brings together more than 20 million workers, represented by over 700 unions in 163 countries) to map local remunicipalisation to aid their campaign to encourage the spread of local forms of democratic public ownership.

4.1 Pathway to Impact

Fischbacher-Smith has followed a strategy of engaging with communities of practice in order to co-design research inquiries (via a mode 2 approach to research) and to translate his research findings on risks and crises at the interface of organisation and technology into improved resilience and risk management for organisations, along with enhanced public safety. This engagement strategy has included sustained involvement in the global risk and crisis management community of professional practice, including in the European Security Awareness Special Interest Group (SASIG), the Barton Summits in the USA, and Cyber Security Connect UK’s international professional meetings. As reported by the SASIG, for example, the world of practice appreciates Fischbacher-Smith for, “the significant addition [his] academic research brings to the overall corporate knowledge of the cybersecurity sector” [5A].

This strategy and its research base have led to personal invitations to apply this research to significant organisations in the public and private sectors. Three prominent examples demonstrate the significance of this research impact on: (a) two global corporations seeking to protect their employees and internet users across the world from extreme harm; (b) one of the biggest UK public inquiries of recent times. Further, they exemplify the reach of the research impact across the world and into the highest forums in which public and corporate policy are formulated.

4.2. Impact on a Multinational Management Consultancy’s Internet and Streaming Services

Fischbacher-Smith was contracted by BakerMcKenzie, a leading US law firm, acting as counsel to one of the world’s largest international management consultancies (which cannot be named under the terms of a confidentiality agreement governing attorney-client privilege). This management consultancy acts on behalf of three global, internet-based Fortune 500 companies to monitor and remove egregious content from the internet. These companies have been making increasing use of streaming services with a concomitant need to moderate content in the face of the more frequent appearance of extreme images of heinous acts, hate speech and other incitements to violence, including among vulnerable populations.

Barton LLC, a crisis and insider threat consultancy in the USA that, through its associate base provides high quality research-based inputs into Fortune 500 Companies, was the US-based co-ordinator of the academic research group on this project. It confirms that, *“Fischbacher-Smith was selected to be the only European representative on a five-person international academic team and to use his research, particularly on viable contingency plans and risk communication, as the basis of advice on how to manage the impacts of egregious content on employees and contractors” [5B]**. It also confirms that, “Fischbacher-Smith’s contribution was in terms of his research on risk and uncertainty within organisations and their links to crisis events, the impacts of exposure to images and the interventions needed to address those impacts, and the design of such organisational interventions and organisational controls to mitigate adverse consequences […] Fischbacher-Smith also provided existing research outputs into the discussions with the clients as a means of supporting their changing organisational practices” [5B].

Their research-based report on suggested changes to the practices of managing these risks was formally submitted in March 2020 [5C]. Barton LLC confirms that, “Many of the recommendations and insights [Fischbacher-Smith] designed have been adopted by the consultancy and client companies, helping to meet the objective of a safer internet for all” [5B]. Specifically, 18 of the 21 recommendations have been implemented (with the remaining three being put on hold due to COVID-19 restrictions in the workplace) [5D]. The consultancy has changed its global working practices by:

1. Adopting a more structured approach to the design of content moderation and the development of a robust and universally applied minimum specification for the delivery of the service.

2. Changing the design of the workspace in which the egregious content was reviewed and assessed as well as changing shift patterns so as to avoid night-time work where the impact of the content is likely to be greater.

3. Enhancing the existing welfare processes that are in place and increasing awareness of them so as to deal more effectively with early warnings of adverse consequences amongst staff.

4. Enhancing the training and onboarding of new staff to incorporate issues around the perception of risk and uncertainty associated with content moderation and the potential opportunities for intervention to mitigate harmful impacts.

4.3. Impact on a Multinational Trading and Logistics Corporation’s Organisational Security and Insider Threats

Again working with Barton LLC under a confidentiality agreement, Fischbacher-Smith’s research impacted on the training of the European and Global security teams for one of the world’s largest and fastest growing logistics companies. He, “designed and delivered a series of research-based training inputs to one of the world's largest corporations that held summits of human resource, security, legal and environmental leaders in Ireland and in Great Britain. The work focused on crisis prevention and recovery in relation to the potential damage arising from internal threat actors to the working population” [5B].

This impact was based specifically on his research findings on risk models, viable contingency plans and communication of risk and uncertainty. The impact comprised:

1. The development of training around a security ergonomics approach to the design of the organisation’s risk and security function specifically to enhance early warnings of potential hazards and the responses to them.

2. Changes to organisational practices to give wider recognition of the nature of threats and their modus operandi and the potential development of radical ideological and theological characteristics amongst employees. *“The impact of this research-led training on the company was considerable and led to changes in operating protocols around early warnings and near-miss events” [5B]**.

3. “Provision of security research-based training to Federal, State, and Local Law Enforcement in the USA around the dynamic nature of threat vectors developed by hostile actors and the role played by the processes of radicalisation in shaping the nature of those threats” extended the consideration given by the agencies to the threats associated with public spaces and the advice given to public groups in the event of such incidents [5B].

4.4. Grenfell Tower Inquiry into the catastrophic London fire

Recognising the significance of his research for its investigation, the Grenfell Tower Inquiry appointed Fischbacher-Smith as external advisor to Phase 2 of the Inquiry in 2019−2020 [5E]. Its Chairman confirms that, “Professor Fischbacher-Smith was appointed as an external expert to advise the Inquiry on its investigation into the response of central and local government to the fire at Grenfell Tower. The appointment was based on his professional standing and followed an extensive search and interview process” [5F].

The scope of Fischbacher-Smith’s work on central and local government responses to the fire are set out in the Letter of Appointment [5E]. His analysis has examined relevant legislation, regulations and National Resilience Guidance, the London and local government arrangements, and the mechanisms of response. The Chairman further confirms that, “As part of his role, Fischbacher-Smith was required to read some 600 items of evidence obtained by the Inquiry and produce a report identifying potentially important areas of investigation. That report ran to some 58 pages (approximately 21,500 words). The advice given in the report was based on his expert knowledge in this field” [5F]. The report to which the Chairman refers was completed in March 2020 and drew on Fischbacher-Smith’s research to provide an analysis of the causal factors in the Grenfell catastrophe and the challenges associated with responding to it. The report is not yet in the public domain as the Inquiry, which has been delayed for twelve months by the pandemic, has not allowed public dissemination of commissioned reports until it publishes its findings [5F].

4.5. Conclusion

The above examples, drawn from a larger portfolio of sustained work of this nature, show Fischbacher-Smith’s commitment to research on risk and resilience and its translation into corporate settings, as well as to continuing efforts that advance public safety. Given the dramatic changes in communications technology, managing organisational resilience has acquired heightened salience, providing new opportunities for business and people but also generating new threats to both. Business and government practices that focus exclusively on cost minimisation, at the expense of risk and resilience, can inflict massive societal damage. Fischbacher-Smith’s research translates into significant impact because it explores complex trade-offs in a practice-focused way, brings insights to the public discourse of some of the most challenging issues of our times, and directly improves the well-being of user communities such as global businesses and those impacted by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. As Barton LLC observes, “it is difficult if not impossible to fully measure the lives saved and post-traumatic stress reduced in the workplace and in society because of this body of work.” [5B].

4.1. Pathways to impact

Paisey’s research into the accountancy profession has enhanced our understanding of the role of the profession at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Through direct engagement with international organisations and standard-setting boards, it has contributed directly to the worldwide restoration of public trust in the profession by shaping international education and ethics policies and practice, as outlined below:

4.2. Impact on international education

The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) comprises more than 170 accountancy bodies in over 130 countries, representing almost 3 million accountants worldwide. Its purpose is to serve the public interest by enhancing the relevance, reputation, and value of the global accountancy profession. Paisey’s work has informed the work of two IFAC standard-setting boards, the International Accounting Education Standards Board (IAESB) and the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA). The IAESB established a range of International Accounting Standards in professional accounting education, including the mandating of CPD for all members of accountancy bodies that are members of IFAC since International Education Standard 7 (IES7) Continuing Professional Development became effective in 2006. All IFAC member bodies are obliged to adopt and implement these standards.

Paisey’s research underpinned a significant shift in policy in IES7 to ensure that CPD continues to legitimise the profession’s claim to serve the public interest. In August 2017, evidence from the research was submitted to the IAESB [5A]. It proposed changes to two aspects of the IES7 exposure draft: First, Paisey’s submission argued that accountants whose role was no longer within accounting should nevertheless be required, on the basis of the research findings, to undertake CPD related to the field of accounting. Second, Paisey questioned the focus on planned CPD, proposing that unplanned but relevant activities should also be included.

Paisey’s formal comments were discussed at IAESB meetings in November 2017 and April 2018. The minutes of the April meeting [5B] record a debate on the exposure draft wording to accord with Paisey’s first point. In July 2018, an Issues Paper recorded that: “Based on respondent feedback […] it is critical that IES7 [revised] make clear that IFAC member body responsibilities for CPD relate to the role of the professional accountant”, rather than to non-accounting roles (p.7-9). This point was only made in the Paisey submission, thus the now finalised revised IES7 has been amended on the basis of Paisey’s evidence [5C]. Moreover, guidance to support the implementation of IES7 includes a discussion of the importance of unplanned as well as planned activities, a revision that aligns with Paisey’s second proposal [5D].

These changes are significant in both geographical reach and regulatory depth as they ensure that the mandatory CPD of almost 3 million accountants worldwide will be undertaken in a manner that is acceptable to both individual members and to the wider profession. The IAESB Director of Skills and Assessment confirmed that: “the new standard talks of the professional accountant, rather than the role in the accounting profession […] It’s very clear now—and the explanatory material really sets out—that CPD is relevant to you as a professional accountant, regardless of the sector in which you work, regardless of the size of the organisation.” She added: “Individuals within professional accounting bodies will be able to better see why they need to do CPD, and take better ownership and responsibility, and therefore, the relevance because it’s there, will lead to enhanced quality of CPD being chosen” [5E].

4.3. Impact on ICAS ethics policy and practice

Paisey is a member of the Council and Ethics Board of ICAS, and through this engagement seeks to keep her research relevant to current concerns within the profession. ICAS is a professional body of more than 23,000 members and 3,000 students who work in over 100 countries around the world. The reports of Paisey’s research on the ethical experiences of chartered accountants, the dilemmas they face, and the support they would like to receive, were launched at events held by ICAS in London and Edinburgh in October 2019. The research findings were further disseminated to all ICAS members via an article in the monthly magazine CA Today [5F], thus increasing member awareness of ethics dilemmas.

Paisey’s research is now underpinning the creation of new ICAS practitioner-focused documents for its members under the Power of One motif. ICAS is currently drafting plans to implement one of the research report’s key recommendations relating to the need for a system of ethics mentoring to support members with ethical dilemmas. The ICAS CEO confirmed, “the research has been extremely informative, insightful and useful to ICAS. It highlights the need for organisations to have appropriate mechanisms in place to encourage speak up and listen up procedures and the benefits that they can bring to organisational culture […] the research has assisted ICAS to identify areas where greater attention and focus is required in order to better meet the needs of members and also to serve its public interest mandate.” [5G]. As a direct result of the research and in order to assist its members, “ICAS decided to further the offering by facilitating access for its members to advice provided by Protect”. Other initiatives in progress in Autumn 2020, which directly stem from the research, include a focus on bullying via a webinar and associated guidance, and the establishment of an ethics mentoring facility to support members with ethical dilemmas [5G].

The research has also supported ICAS submissions to two reviews. First, ICAS included Paisey’s research findings in its submission to the UK Financial Reporting Council’s consultation on revisions to the Corporate Governance Code. Second, in its comments on the Exposure Draft on the Role and Mindset Expected of Professional Accountants, issued by IESBA (the international standard-setting ethics board), ICAS proposed that: “to ensure a successful organisational culture, employees need to feel they can speak up about concerns without retribution, that their concerns are listened to, and, most importantly, are followed up”. ICAS evidenced this by means of appending links to Paisey’s two monographs at the end of its submission [5H]. The need for this additional inclusion in the exposure draft was discussed at the December 2019 meeting [5I] and included in the marked-up copy of the proposed exposure draft [5J], which includes reference to protection for whistleblowers as part of the promotion of an ethical culture. The ICAS CEO confirmed: “This assisted in ensuring that the IESBA Task Force in charge of this project considered the need for inclusion of a specific reference to whistleblowing in relation to possible new content on organisational culture” [5G].

4.4. Impact on the wider international business community

The findings and recommendations from Paisey’s research are also relevant to the wider business community. ICAS has sent the reports to various international bodies; for example, the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants has uploaded links to the two reports on its website. The Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (CISI) also believe that the results contain important messages for their members, and hence participated in the research monograph launch events with ICAS. In addition, the Head of Professional Standards at CISI invited Paisey to deliver a presentation in Cyprus in November 2019, writing that: “while your research focused primarily on Chartered Accountants, I strongly feel that your findings […] are relevant for all professionals – including those CISI members working within securities, investment, wealth and financial planning” [5K].

Other international organisations have found the research useful in clarifying or supporting their thinking, informing policy evaluation (confirmed by collated evidence **[5L]**). For instance, PwC is the largest professional services firm in the UK with revenues of GBP4.2bn in 2019 and approximately 25,000 employees. PwC’s Ethics Partner commented that: “the information [in the research monographs] about the experience of the wider accounting profession was helpful in contextualising the reports we receive on our Speak Up facility”. He confirmed that PwC had been reviewing its own in-house Speak Up facility and wrote that the research findings were, “helpful in considering the specifications of the new arrangements” and added, ‘I particularly found the focus in the Report on “Listen Up” of interest and supportive of views emerging within PwC as to how best to handle whistleblowing in its widest sense’ [5L].

4.5. Beneficiaries

Taken together, Paisey’s education and ethics research has highlighted issues that need to be addressed by the accountancy profession, professional firms and other organisations (these practitioners are the primary beneficiaries of the research). This has led to changes to professional services in order to provide a culture in which accountants (and professionals in other sectors) effectively maintain professional competence and feel able to speak up where they have concerns, both of which are necessary conditions for public trust and the protection of the public interest (therefore, the public are secondary beneficiaries of this research).

4.1. Pathways to impact

Mason’s long-term impact strategy has brought international recognition through significant contributions to our understanding of entrepreneurship and the conditions that support the emergence of HGFs. This has directly informed supranational, national and regional policies and practices, as outlined below:

4.2. Informing the supranational policy environment

The underpinning research has informed the policy-influencing communities of the OECD and EU by presenting additional understandings on ways that targeted support mechanisms can promote entrepreneurial activity. For instance, in November 2013, Mason was keynote speaker at an OECD workshop in The Hague, where he presented the highly-influential invited paper [3.1], which has subsequently been cited in 902 related articles according to Google Scholar . In March 2014, Mason presented an invited contribution on ‘High-Growth Firm Policies’ at the European Commission Conference on Innovation Policies. His research is cited extensively throughout the final report [5A], which stresses the importance of equity finance for policymakers, particularly by private venture capital and angel investors.

4.3. Informing policy within the UK

Building upon this high-level influence, “Mason’s advice and expertise has been invaluable in the implementation of several major policies by the Department of Business Energy and Industry Strategy (BEIS)” (confirmed by statement **[5B]**). In 2017, the UK Government embarked on a Patient Capital Review, which investigated the availability of long-term finance for innovative firms. The review made use of Mason’s publications [3.2, 3.5], with the former paper deemed important enough to be referenced in the official consultation document published in August 2017 [5C]. Statement [5B] confirms the use of the underpinning research and adds that: “ these papers, coupled with direct submissions provided the review with recognition of business angels as ‘smart’ investors that are perfect patient investors.”

Mason’s research, “again had a direct impact on government policy in 2018” [5B]. He submitted a comprehensive and highly-informative submission during a consultation to amend the Enterprise Investment Scheme’s fund structure (with the intention of improving the supply of capital to knowledge-intensive companies). This submission was, “relevant to the decision not to restrict reliefs for business angels”, as under the Enterprise Investment Scheme, angels are eligible for both income tax and capital gains tax relief (confirmed by statement **[5B]**). Since the 2017 review, the UK Government has taken significant steps in implementing its Patient Capital Action Plan. For example, it launched British Patient Capital and a new Regional Angels Programme in 2018.

The Economic Adviser for Business Finance at BEIS wrote, “Professor Mason’s extensive writings on the VC [venture capital] market and business angels have acted as a highly useful asset for the department. His provision of not only tailormade submissions to address topics that were of particular interest to BEIS but regular on-hand informal advice has resulted in Professor Mason consistently surpassing his own very high standards for engaging with government on pertinent issues of the day.” [5B].

4.4. Stimulating business angel investment activity in the UK and Scotland

In 2015, an Outstanding Impact in Business Award [5D] recognised the significant contribution of Mason and Harrison’s research towards stimulating business angel investment in the UK (a market worth approximately GBP750 million per annum). Mason has worked alongside investor groups to promote the role of business angels to policymakers as a key source of entrepreneurial finance. His research has also fed directly into ‘investment readiness’ programmes (which help to understand how business angels operate and what they are looking for, so that entrepreneurs can make more effective pitches). This activity has resulted in more businesses seeking finance from angel investors, and thus more investments being made (confirmed by short film **[5E]**).

For example, the Scottish Angel Capital Association (LINC) plays an active role in an angel ecosystem now recognised as among the most developed in Europe. The Chief Executive said, “Mason has been a leading researcher and influencer in the business angel ecosystem in Scotland and beyond for many years.” Mason’s research (prior to joining the UofG in 2012) was crucial in introducing and promoting the concept of ‘investment readiness’, resulting in the development of programmes to address the knowledge and skills gap across the UK. The Chief Executive of LINC Scotland confirms that, “the effectiveness and sophistication of these [programmes] were enhanced by later studies such as…” [3.4, **3.6]**… “This has undoubtedly contributed to the fact that between August 2013 and December 2018 the annual number of companies funded, and amount invested, almost doubled.” (confirmed by statement **[5F]**). With the support of Mason’s research, angel investments in Scotland have increased from approximately GBP27 million in 2013 to approximately GBP64 million in 2018 (figures confirmed by report **[5G]**).

4.5. Stimulating business angel investment activity in Canada and Sweden

Mason’s research has played a key role in raising the profile of business angels among policymakers and investors in Canada. Mason was invited by the National Angel Capital Organization (NACO) to be lead author of their annual Investment Activity Reports 2015–2019. The CEO wrote, ‘NACO’s annual Angel Activity Reports have drawn distinctly and materially upon Professor Mason’s research and expertise and have recently found that every $1.00 of angel investment results in $156.00 in revenue for angel-backed companies, tangibly growing the Canadian GDP. These reports are vital in demonstrating to policymakers the important role that Angels play in Canada’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. With the support of Professor Mason’s policy recommendations in 2017, the Government of Canada created the Women Entrepreneur Fund to support female and indigenous entrepreneurs. This $30 million fund was fully allocated in 2019 and supported 320 female-led businesses, with six already receiving additional angel investments valued at $1.5 million.’ (confirmed by statement **[5H]**).

The Manager for Innovation, Science and Economic Development, Canada, confirms that: ‘NACO’s annual Report on Angel Investing in Canada is the only comprehensive data set in Canada on angel group investment. It plays a valuable role helping government to understand how the financing of the entrepreneurial ecosystem works. It contributes to the evidence that the government needs to develop its programs, such as the support for angel investing that is delivered through Regional Development Agencies’ (confirmed by email **[5I]**). With support from Mason’s research and the Canadian Government, the number of angel group investments increased from 283 in 2015 (worth approximately CAD133.6 million) to 583 in 2018 (worth approximately CAD142.8 million) [5H].

Beyond Canada, a range of international operators have benefited from Mason’s analysis. For instance, the Chief Executive of LINC Scotland also confirms that, “operators in Scotland have benefited from analysis at a market level both UK-wide and overseas, giving the ability to benchmark with studies such as […] the longitudinal annual series for the National Angel Capital Organisation (Canada)”. Furthermore, from 2015 onwards, Mason was asked to evaluate Swedish co-investment funds and invited to co-author a report on financial exits, which was presented to the Swedish Government in 2017. An Analyst from the Swedish Agency for Growth Policy Analysis wrote, “Mason’s research was informative in terms of establishing evidence around a gap in the supply of equity capital in Sweden […] since the presentation of the report it has been a serious interest and [informed] a much more intense discussion about exits in general as well as a more specific discussion about exit-centric approaches and entrepreneurial recycling.” (confirmed by collated evidence **[5J]**).

4.1. Pathways to impact

Inspired by the early findings of the research [3.4], a series of workshops led and attended by UofG researchers facilitated the formation of Glasgow Food Policy Partnership (GFPP), with key local stakeholders agreeing to join under a shared commitment to healthier, more sustainable and resilient food systems. The establishment of GFPP underpinned a new policy environment within the city (as outlined in section 4.2 below), which has since shaped the co-production by researchers and stakeholders of the Glasgow City Food Plan (as outlined in section 4.3 below). This city-wide approach is augmented by a community-level initiative in Dalmarnock, which supports increased food production and healthy consumption (as outlined in section 4.4 below); enhanced food knowledge and community cohesion (as outlined in section 4.5 below).

4.2. Informing the development of a new policy environment

The establishment of GFPP marked the beginnings of a new and more inclusive policy environment within the city, designed to drive sustainable change based upon multiple-stakeholder perspectives. The Sustainable Glasgow Manager and Chief Resilience Officer at Glasgow City Council confirms that, ‘Professors Shaw, McMaster and Cumbers’ research played a central role in the establishment of Glasgow Food Policy Partnership (GFPP) in 2014 […] The formation of GFPP is a significant step for the city, as it ensures a place for community representatives on its committee, alongside public officials and representatives of NGOs - thus enabling members of the public to feed into local authority decisions and activities, as required by the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act (2015).’ (confirmed by statement **[5A]**)

This partnership now includes Glasgow City Council, Scottish Government, NHS Scotland, Soil Association Scotland and FareShare—the UK’s largest anti-food-waste charity. The resultant GFPP Charter ‘Good Food for All’ [5B] has been signed by 115 businesses, third sector organisations and local food growers to date. The Sustainable Glasgow Manager and Chief Resilience Officer at Glasgow City Council notes that, ‘a key research recommendation was that an overarching partnership could act as a focus for informing food policy within the city’. [5A]

On the recommendation of its Council representative, GFPP has become Glasgow’s primary link to the Sustainable Food Cities Network. This network facilitates practical guidance based upon the experiences of towns and cities across the UK (an imperative originally outlined by the underpinning research [3.1, **3.4]**). Reporting on Sustainable Food Cities in 2016, Glasgow City Council’s Sustainability and Environment Policy and Development Committee stated that, *‘The principal means by which the Council has engaged in the development of this work has been through the Glasgow Food Policy Partnership […] GFPP is helping to deliver on the city’s anti-poverty agenda through its own work on tackling food poverty **.*’ [5C]

4.3. The co-production of Glasgow City Food Plan

The creation of Glasgow City Food Plan is a legal requirement of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act (2015). Statement [5A] confirms that, ** ‘GFPP is now the main organisation tasked with leading the consultation and development of Glasgow City Food Plan’*. GFPP acts as a conduit to key local stakeholders and as a means of engaging with likeminded organisations throughout the UK through the Sustainable Food Cities Network. UofG researchers have been active members of two of the six workstreams that have drafted sections of the Plan (i.e. Food Procurement and Food Waste and Environment). The underpinning research [3.2, 3.4] is directly cited in the official Glasgow City Food Plan consultation document [5D], which was launched on 8 October 2020. Following a public consultation which ran until 31 December 2020, Glasgow City Food Plan will be finalised in 2021.

Reflecting upon this collaborative policy development, the Public Health Programme Manager at Glasgow Centre for Population Health confirmed, ‘The research of Shaw, McMaster, Cumbers and Anderson […] has provided additional understandings of the links between localised food growing initiatives and the wider social, economic and environmental issues of the day […] The research has highlighted the inequitable distribution of community food projects across the city and demonstrated a need for more secure and sustainable funding to support the sector’s intrinsic value, as well as its net benefits to Glasgow.’ She continued, ‘The contribution of UofG research and engagement activity is highly-significant as the Glasgow City Food Plan is an ambitious project that supports the delivery of a number of other strategies and plans at citywide and national levels. The researchers’ community-level knowledge and evidence from the underpinning research has played a vitally-important role in supporting this intensive period of policy development.’ (confirmed by statement **[5E]**)

4.4. Increased food production and healthy consumption

Based upon two EU/Scottish Government-funded Social Innovation Fund projects, UofG researchers and Baltic Street Adventure Playground (BSAP) have pioneered an award-winning Community Food Hub in Dalmarnock—one of the city’s most disadvantaged areas (confirmed by award [5F] and project report **[3.6]**). As a result, an area of once-derelict land has been transformed into a thriving community space, which now sustains an array of fresh produce to support communal cooking experiences and the provision of nutritious meals (confirmed by short film **[5G]**). BSAP is used throughout the year, particularly over school holidays, with 7,409 visits and approximately 15,000 meal portions served over the summer of 2019. The annual attendance for 2019 was approximately 21,000 visits (numbers confirmed by email **[5H]**).

This child-focused project brings parents and guardians together with experienced growers in an area where fresh, affordable food is not always readily available. BSAP’s raised beds, renovated prior to the project’s start, were combined with a project-funded polytunnel to produce a range of fruit and vegetables (e.g. onions, carrots, potatoes, alpine strawberries, peas, tomatoes, rhubarb, broccoli and kale) from a growing area of approximately 250 square metres. The team of local growers at BSAP estimate that between 80–100 kilograms of produce has been grown since the project began in 2017. They added that, ‘carrots proved particularly popular with the children, who liked to pull them directly from the ground, wash them and eat them straight away’ (confirmed in statement from local growers **[5I]**).

The produce grown on site is integrated into the daily menu in salads, pasta sauces and curries. It also supports informal learning experiences to develop participants’ knowledge of the food system and healthy eating (e.g. tomatoes are used in workshops to make relish, courgettes to make fritters in cooking classes). The produce grown locally is supplemented with food deliveries twice a week from the UK’s largest anti-food-waste charity, FareShare. A statement from local growers confirms that the UofG project funding, ‘allowed the Community Food Hub to move from one to two deliveries per week, doubling its capacity to support the local community through local meals and food surplus’. [5I]

4.5. Enhanced knowledge of food and improved community cohesion

Local residents who visit the Community Food Hub have demonstrated a range of benefits, with two key themes identified in the research report [3.6]. Firstly, BSAP provides a space for experimentation with food that may be unfamiliar, or might otherwise be too expensive. For instance, Participant A said: ‘there is all different things you can try […] gluten free things […] there’s always so much variety that you can choose from and there’s people coming in and saying, “Oh my goodness, that will do me for three days, at least I’m going to have dinners for my kids for three days”’. Participant B added, ‘Usually, I wouldn’t eat anything like that [cabbage], but I just thought I will, just let me try, and I actually enjoyed it.’ Secondly, the Food Hub provides a much-needed focal point for the community in an area with very few local amenities. Participant A added : ‘the community’s starting to get back together, we’re starting to see each other again […] because we don’t have shops, you don’t really see anybody, but coming to the park [BSAP], you bump into people that you’ve not seen for a long time. I’ve seen people come in I’ve not seen maybe in ten years’ (quotes confirmed by participant interviews **[5J]**).

4.6. Next steps

Through this innovative research-based intervention, co-produced by researchers and the communities of policy and practice, UofG research is contributing to the alleviation of food poverty through embedded engagement and deep local impact (as outlined above). This work supports social welfare within the city, through sustainable self-managing programmes, which make essential connections between local food growing and the global environmental, social and economic challenges of the day. Both at community and policy levels, this work looks set to underpin significant impact activity beyond the REF2021 period.

Lack of transparency erodes legitimacy, encourages waste and corruption, and threatens the services available to citizens. Heald’s research on transparency has been, “important in raising the profile of fiscal transparency and improved public sector financial reporting among policy-makers, practitioners and civil society groups… [and contributed] to managing risks to fiscal sustainability and public services, and… to the development and dissemination of good practice.” (statement from the Auditor General for Scotland, 2012-20 **[5A]**).

From 2015-20, Heald has continued his career-long strategy of contributing to the international and domestic public financial management community, providing not only relevant research but also findings translated into formats that meet the needs of international organisations, national and devolved governments, UK and devolved parliaments, and public audit institutions. The Auditor General for Scotland wrote, “I have seen the impact of his [Heald’s] work internationally through organisations such as the IMF and the OECD, and directly in Scotland as the Scottish Parliament has taken on major new fiscal powers over the last five years.” [5A].

4.1. At international level

Heald’s research [3.1, 3.2, 3.3] has underpinned briefings on fiscal transparency to international policy actors including the IMF’s Fiscal Affairs Department, the OECD, the South Korean Ministry of Economy and Finance, and the World Bank Governance Division (confirmed by collated evidence **[5B]**).

In response to a request from the then UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, an IMF technical assistance mission carried out a Fiscal Transparency Evaluation of the UK in 2016. The team was familiar with Heald’s research and met him as part of their fieldwork (confirmed by statement from the former head of the IMF Public Financial Management Division **[5C]**). The resultant IMF report, “concurred with Heald’s commendation of the technical achievements of the UK Treasury”, but also (a) “his identification of the severe fiscal risks from PPPs [Public-Private Partnerships] and other off-balance sheet techniques such as government guarantees” and (b) “his criticisms of the lack of timeliness of Estimates”. As a result of the report, better documentation is now provided on fiscal risk, but progress on timeliness is less likely because the UK Government asserted its prerogatives over Parliament during the conflict over Brexit (confirmed by official reports **[5D]**).

While proponents argue that PPPs offer a more efficient use of public funds and more streamlined processes than publicly funded vehicles, current public sector accounting rules and public finance statistics allow PPPs to be used to hide public debt and often suffer from a lack of transparency and limited public scrutiny. Heald’s research has been reported in the Economist, and by the BBC [5L]. His contributions to the OECD’s Senior Budget Officials Network (2016-2020) in “the areas of PPPs and government guarantees, particularly in relation to neutrality in project appraisal and financial reporting…have strongly influenced International Transport Forum/OECD positions” (statement from the ITF/OECD Procurement and Private Investment in Infrastructure Lead **[5E]**).

Heald’s transparency research has also impacted on the development of harmonised public sector accounting and greater alignment between government financial reporting and statistical accounting (i.e. national accounts). He contributed to the Eurostat project to develop European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS), and presented his research findings at the European Court of Auditors [5F]. The EPSAS Project Lead confirmed, “[Heald] reminded us through his research that improving fiscal transparency is a continuous process that must be nurtured and protected [and] made an important contribution to the work of statisticians, through the clear linkage in his work between statistical accounting and public financial management.” (statement from the Head of the EPSAS Project , Eurostat **[5F]**).

4.2. At UK level

Heald also translated his transparency research into a wide range of briefings for UK policy actors on fiscal transparency, including Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, National Infrastructure Commission and the Study of Parliament Group (confirmed by collated evidence **[5B]**).

Heald demonstrated to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee of the House of Commons that the UK’s impressive accounting reforms, regarded as among the most sophisticated in the world, have not been matched by transparency advances in accessibility and use. He was extensively cited in the Committee’s report on Accounting for democracy: making sure Parliament, the people and ministers know how and why public money is spent (April 2017) (confirmed by official report **[5A]**). Following a Treasury review of enhancements to the clarity and usefulness of financial reporting, Heald was appointed by the Treasury to its newly-established User Preparer Advisory Group [5D], where at the first meeting on 23 January 2020 he secured agreement that associated documents and minutes would become publicly available after the subsequent meeting, thus enhancing transparency.

To improve quality and scrutiny in the UK, Heald argued for a Spending and Tax Committee that would look explicitly and continuously at the relationship between expenditure and revenue. He highlighted problems with the current ex ante system, which is Executive-dominated and legislated four months into the financial year. Heald’s research-based proposals [3.1] were extensively cited in the Procedure Committee’s 2017 report on Supply and taken forward in the 2017-19 Parliament through its Budget Committee inquiry, to which Heald provided further written and oral evidence cited in the basis for conclusions. They “clearly helped to shape the Procedure Committee’s subsequent proposals for a Budget Committee and the Committee’s understanding of the need for separation between the functions of the new Committee and the audit-related roles of the National Audit Office and Committee of Public Accounts… Professor Heald’s involvement and advice has helped the Committee to frame recommendations which reflect an understanding of the concerns and priorities of the Treasury and the National Audit Office and which are thus likely to have an enduring impact on how Parliament undertakes its financial scrutiny role in the future.” (statement from the Managing Director, Select Committees Team, House of Commons **[5D]**).

Using his research [3.6], Heald contributed to the parliamentary analysis of the UK fiscal response to the COVID-19 pandemic, submitting written evidence (August 2020) to the Treasury Committee’s Inquiry into Taxation after Coronavirus [5D].

4.3. At the level of devolved government within the UK

Heald’s impact has been to increase the transparency and accountability of Scottish public finances, including support for government statisticians’ improvements in data quality (confirmed by statement [5G] from the Regulatory Services Office for Statistics Regulation, UK Statistics Authority). Heald gave research-based oral evidence in sessions with Scottish Parliament Committees and in a private meeting with the Budget Process Review Group, commissioned by the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government to review the budgetary process and reinforce the principles of transparency and accountability (confirmed by official reports **[5H]**). “His work on the theorisation of public audit has helped Audit Scotland and other public audit agencies to clarify their purpose, recognising public trust as an important side effect of effective public audit, achieved through increasing fiscal transparency rather than as an end in itself.” (statement from the Auditor General for Scotland, 2012-20 **[5A]**).

The Fiscal Framework agreement between the Scottish and UK Governments determines how Scotland is funded and underpins the powers set out in the Scotland Act 2016. Heald advised on the choice of the block grant adjustment mechanism within the 2016 Scottish Fiscal Framework after tax devolution was extended , and is now contributing to Scottish preparations for the 2021 renegotiation with the aim of enhancing the accountability of Scotland’s public finances (confirmed in a statement from the Chief Economic Adviser to the Scottish Government **[5I]**).

The impact of his research on the 10-year journey to Welsh fiscal devolution has been acknowledged by Mark Drakeford AM, then Cabinet Secretary for Finance, and Simon Thomas AM, then Chair of the National Assembly for Wales Finance Committee, who described Heald as, “one of the people who played a part in helping successive Welsh Governments and National Assemblies on this fiscal devolution journey.” [5J].

Heald’s research [3.5] was extensively cited by the UK Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee in its 2019 report [5J] criticising the operation of the funding arrangements for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, continuing the pressure for greater transparency to which the Treasury has slowly responded.

Heald’s research [3.4] has also impacted on the policy analysis of how Brexit will affect Scottish public finances and public services. His ESRC-funded series of seminars was attended by government officials, business leaders and EU diplomats as well as academics [5K]. He submitted evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Finance and Constitution Committee on 27 September 2017 regarding the impact of Brexit on the Scottish budget, and was involved in the planning by Audit Scotland on the direct implications of Brexit for Scottish public finances and public services (2018) (confirmed by collated evidence **[5K]**).

Recently Heald chaired a committee of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) which in October 2020 submitted an Advice Paper [5J] to the Scottish Government consultation on the COVID-affected Scottish Budget 2021-22, then represented the RSE in the stakeholder consultation on 5 November 2020 chaired by Kate Forbes MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance [5J].

Thus, through a deliberate cyclical engagement strategy of research stimulated by policy and practice, Heald’s work has impacted on the protection and promotion of fiscal transparency in the Scottish Government and Parliament, the UK Parliament and Treasury, and internationally through the OECD and IMF.