addressing a research funding challenge in South Africa

A growing global concern within research funding systems is the difficulty of capturing and promoting societal impact—the tangible benefits of research beyond academic outputs. In South Africa, the National Research Foundation (NRF) recognized that while its investments have led to demonstrable knowledge impact—as shown in its researcher rating system and research output assessments—evidence of societal impact remains limited.

One of the key challenges in South Africa’s research ecosystem is the limited connection between research funding and demonstrable societal benefit. Funders, typically engaged at the outset of the research process, often have minimal visibility or influence over downstream outcomes. This structural limitation makes it difficult to track how funded research contributes to addressing societal needs or advancing public policy. Bridging this disconnect has become increasingly urgent, not only to ensure alignment with national development priorities but also to secure value from research investments. An additional challenge is discerning potential for societal impact at the funding stage before the research has begun.

To address these challenges and to respond to the NRF’s Vision 2030, centered on transformation, innovation, excellence, and sustainability for impact (TIES4I), the NRF constituted a task team to discern approaches to advancing research impact in South Africa. The task team considered both the national context and international research and practice on research impact.

Lessons from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) highlighted the importance of impact case studies, combining qualitative narratives with quantitative indicators. Canada’s International Development Research Centre’s (IDRC) Research Quality Plus approach informed the NRF’s thinking on spheres of control, influence, and interest—a framework particularly suited to funders with limited direct control over implementation. Similarly, New Zealand’s pathways to impact model helped articulate how early planning and engagement can shape long-term outcomes. The Global Research Council’s 2019 Statement of Principles provided further guidance on structuring both ex-ante and ex-post impact assessments.

Guided by this evidence base, the NRF developed its research impact framework, designed to shape research from funding design to research methodologies and partnerships, while also embedding the NRF’s TIES4I pillars.

Defining impact and impact pathways

The NRF’s impact framework explains how research can lead to societal benefit within the South African context. It outlines broad research impact pathways to help identify opportunities for positive change and provides a structure for assessing progress along these routes. Impact is defined as a “beneficial change in society or knowledge advancement, brought about as a direct or indirect result of the NRF’s research support interventions, whether planned or unintended; immediate or long-term.”

Unlike the UKRI, which removed the requirement for impact statements in funding applications, the NRF considers them essential. These statements prompt researchers to clearly define the societal challenge their work addresses, identify potential beneficiaries and partners, outline necessary activities, and anticipate intended outcomes.  The focus is on identifying the potential for impact early, encouraging approaches that are more likely to deliver it, and shifting the emphasis from academic outputs to meaningful real-world change.

Implementing the research impact framework

To operationalize its impact framework and promote a culture of impact, the NRF identified five key implementation areas:

1. Policy and instrument coherence: Reviewing internal policies and funding mechanisms to align them with impact goals and methodologies.
2. Impact literacy campaign: This involved appointing impact champions across the NRF’s units, while also coordinating engagement across the broader higher education and research sector. The NRF adopted a collaborative approach with other institutions, such as Universities South Africa (USAf) and the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), to ensure co-creation across the sector. Furthermore, it held an impact workshop with the International Organisation for Advancing and Evaluating the Societal Impact of Science (AESIS), which was followed by a conference organised by AESIS and the South African Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC).
3. Incentives and recognition: Introducing rewards and funding mechanisms that promote impact. In 2024, the NRF Societal Impact Award was launched, generating the first collection of ex-post societal impact case studies. This will be continued and expanded in 2025.
4. Methodological innovation: Encouraging the use of research approaches conducive to societal impact, including mission-oriented research, engaged and partnered research, and trans and intradisciplinary methods. This included the development of an impact-aligned NRF Engaged Research Framework.
5. Impact assessment: Piloting assessments along the impact pathway, using both ex-ante (impact statements) and ex-post (case studies) assessment, as well as post-grant reporting on outputs and outcomes. The emphasis is on qualitative case studies supported by evidence of societal benefit and change.

A sector-wide shift in thinking

These reforms mark a shift in how research impact is understood and pursued within South Africa’s national system of innovation. Rather than positioning societal impact as a byproduct, the NRF’s approach builds it into the research lifecycle. The enthusiastic engagement from researchers, universities, and institutions indicates a growing recognition of the value of this change and a collective movement toward a more accountable, impactful research system.