Blog post written by Dr Katey Warran
The BSA Virtual Annual Conference on the theme of Crisis, Continuity and Change took place 3-5 April 2024. During the conference, I attended a participatory session facilitated by Professor Priscilla Alderson and Dr Rob Faure Walker (University College London) entitled: Sociology is missing from Mainstream Media and Public Debate: What might Sociologists do about this? The foundational argument of the session was that sociological research overflows with valuable analysis and findings, but they seldom reach policy makers, the mainstream media and the general public. And the discussion was about why this may be and how we can collectively work towards embedding sociology in public debates and contexts.
As someone working in the applied field of ‘arts and health’, whereby there is a need to engage policymakers, funders, and communities with academic research to mobilise findings that can improve arts and health practice, this discussion at BSA felt very relevant to me. I’ve been working in arts and health for a decade and I rarely see sociological research or findings drawn upon in public debates, and I am often asking myself why this may be. In this blog, I explore the debates of the BSA session on public sociology and document my reflections regarding how the debates could have relevance to the field of arts and health.
The session began by it being noted that there are barriers to sociology being as wide-spread as psychology and economics in the UK, drawing on the example of COVID-19, whereby sociologists were not given centre stage in relation to finding solutions to the challenges of the pandemic. It was suggested that one of the reasons for this may be that governments and research institutions face pressures regarding achieving ‘impact’, with many approaches and methods from psychology and economic studies presenting more immediate pathways to demonstrating such impact. This resonated with me in the context of what research translates into policies and practices relevant to arts and health. While there has been increasing interest in understanding sociopolitical processes in recent years, the dominant focus in arts and health has been on measuring and evidencing impact too. And this makes sense when the field is so reliant on government funding, with the medical hierarchy of evidence often underpinning processes of embedding arts programmes into health systems, whereby ‘impact’ measures are important to gain ‘buy in’ from decision-makers.
It was then raised in the session that another reason that sociology may be overlooked within public dialogue and political debates is because perhaps the UK government may “block more radical content”, especially if it goes against the interests of those with power and money. Sociology is seen as “at risk” of bringing to the fore such radical content due to its often-critical character. While there was recognition in the session that sociology is not always critical, there seemed to be a general consensus that there are fears from others outside of sociology that it has the potential to be, and therefore people may view it as potentially damaging to mainstream public agendas. I reflected whether there may be people from within the arts and health community who may wish to apply or explore critical methodologies, but feel apprehensive about doing so.
Many people present in the BSA discussion also shared stories of feeling constrained and controlled by universities and the structures they’re working within, as well as “bogged down” by bureaucracies. One attendee posed: How much freedom do we currently have to speak out? There was a discussion about whether many people in academia are waiting for permission to speak, living in fear of saying “the wrong thing”. This led to a reflection on current funding opportunities, whereby many felt that nationalised research agendas, such as funding provided by the government, often prescribe certain methods and values. By contrast, unfunded research can move away from mainstream agendas and be more political, seeking to “ask the questions that people don’t want to be asked”. But there are major inequalities to this, and it means that only those with the time and resources to conduct unfunded research can work on topics that may fall outside of national agendas and priorities. I’ve certainly heard similar discussions in the field, whereby people feel pulled towards conducting research that aligns with governmental agendas or those of other funding bodies, unable to find time for ‘passion projects’ that are harder to fund.
The complex dilemma of balancing what one wants to work on with “going somewhere with your career” was also raised. It was suggested that often funded research opportunities that present pathways to career development are the ones that researchers may not feel the most passionate about, and where voices are censored. I wondered how much this could be having an effect on the choices of early career researchers (ECRs) in the field of arts and health. It made me reflect on recent work I’ve been involved with (EC3R project, UCL) which highlighted that many ECRs in the field feel that there are systemic and structural issues (e.g., precarity in funding and jobs, lengthy funding applications, power imbalances) which make it hard to forge a stable career (Finn et al., forthcoming). It made me question the extent to which ECRs may feel constrained by these structural issues in the context of what research is conducted and what research moves into public spaces.
Towards the end of the BSA discussion, someone in the group asked how sociology could be made relevant to public debate and what kinds of approaches, theories, and data from sociological studies would be useful. This felt like an appropriate end point, leaving us questioning what actions we could all take to advocate for the role of sociology in public spaces, discourses, and debates. It certainly left me asking: How is sociology relevant to public debates concerning the role of the arts in health, and what kinds of approaches, theories, and data from sociological studies are useful in the contexts I am working within?
To learn more about our work on the Sociology of Arts and Health, funded by the Leverhulme Trust, please click here.
Reference: Finn, S., Berkhout, S., Wright, L., Arslanovski, N., & Warran, K. (forthcoming). Reflecting on interdisciplinary and cross-sector working in arts, health and humanities research: Recommendations for meaningful collaboration and future directions. Image credit: British Sociological Association, Annual Conference Archive.
Comments