Participants shared a sense that the current system is under strain. While public trust in science remains broadly high, engagement is uneven, structural barriers hinder meaningful collaboration, and many communities feel disconnected from research. The new Government’s commitment to ensuring citizen benefit from R&I adds urgency to rethinking how the system works.

The day’s discussions revealed a collective appetite for moving from project-based, transactional, or outreach-focused approaches toward long-term, relational and participatory models that enable communities to shape and benefit from R&I. The event aimed to surface good practice, diagnose systemic barriers, and explore what it would take to develop a more coherent and future-ready engagement ecosystem.

The opening panel—featuring speakers from UKRI, Black South West Network (BSWN) and CaSE—provided a stark but constructive assessment of where the R&I–society relationship currently stands.

Shifting Power Toward Communities

Speakers emphasised the need to “flip” traditional models of engagement. Rather than researchers inviting the public into pre-defined agendas, communities should be supported to lead, shape, and own the knowledge that matters to them. Examples such as UKRI’s Community Knowledge Fund show how this approach builds skills, confidence and public understanding.

Sado Jirde (BSWN) described the transformation that occurs when communities move from being “over-researched” to becoming co-researchers, generating data and evidence that give them real agency.

Fragile Public Mandate and Political Risks

Ben Bleasdale (CaSE) warned that although most people think R&D is “a good thing”, few view it as urgent or relevant to their own lives. Cost-of-living pressures, declining youth agency and polarised political narratives risk undermining support for public investment in R&I.

He argued that R&I must be reframed as a public service, not a luxury or specialist domain.

Embedding Participation Upstream

Speakers urged embedding participatory approaches not only in outreach but also in the early stages of innovation, especially around emerging technologies. Communities need to be involved before new technologies arrive, not after impacts are felt.

Key Takeaways

• Valuing lived experience must be foundational, not supplementary.
• Engagement should be designed to deliver agency, not just awareness.
• Building trust requires time, continuity and transparent intent.
• Public involvement belongs at the heart of research design and priority setting.

This session showcased three pioneering models of future-facing engagement: 

IRIS – Young people as researchers

IRIS demonstrated how schools can become sites of authentic scientific discovery, with students taking part in real R&I—from finding new penguin colonies to identifying NASA calibration errors. These experiences build young people’s science capital, particularly at moments when interest typically declines.

brap – Anti-racist community-led research

brap presented its work training young people to research lived experiences of racism within their own communities. The process built confidence, skills and intergenerational dialogue, showing that ethical, community-owned research can catalyse broader civic participation and social change.

The Mixed Museum – Belonging before learning

The Mixed Museum shared its co-created heritage and DNA-based research project with people of mixed African American GI heritage. The project demonstrated that a sense of belonging, safety and shared identity must precede meaningful learning or scientific engagement—particularly for communities who feel excluded from institutions.

The final panel (Royal Society, Research England, NCACE, and MeDR) reflected on what the sector must do next.

A. Sustaining the Infrastructure for Engagement

Panel members noted that public engagement units, brokers and skilled practitioners are under real threat due to funding pressures. Without this infrastructure, the connective tissue of the R&I ecosystem frays.

B. Tackling Deep Institutional Barriers

Speakers pointed out that:

• HE systems still reward outputs over outcomes.
• Risk-taking, co-production and long-term partnerships remain undervalued.
• Structural change is required if engagement is to become a mainstream expectation of research.

C. Redistribution of Power and Resources

Institutions, particularly national academies and funders, must be prepared to hand over power, share resources, and support organisations embedded in communities.

D. Engagement as a Driver of Economic and Social Value

Steven Hill emphasised that engagement must connect clearly to economic benefit and societal wellbeing if it is to have political traction. Suzie Leighton argued for assessment frameworks that recognise social and cultural value, not just economic metrics.

E. Collective Action and UKRI’s Role

Panellists agreed that UKRI is uniquely placed to:

• convene cross-sector partnerships
• pool or align funding
• support platforms for learning
• help shift norms, incentives and evaluation
• articulate a shared national vision for public benefit from R&I

Throughout the event, the NCCPE’s Engaged Futures project provided a shared language for thinking about system change and the future relationship between R&I and society. NCCPE’s Sophie Duncan introduced the Three Horizons framework, which many participants then used to make sense of the examples and challenges discussed across the day. 

• Horizon 1 helped highlight the pressures on the current system—fragmentation, fragile trust, uneven participation, and short‑term funding cycles.
• Horizon 2 shone a light on emerging innovations, illustrated by examples such as IRIS, brap and The Mixed Museum, where new models of participation, belonging and community leadership are already taking shape. [UKRI Agend...ry webpage | Word]
• Horizon 3 invited delegates to imagine more ambitious futures, where engagement is embedded in governance, communities shape research agendas, and public benefit guides the whole system.

What emerged was a strong sense that the UK already has many of the ingredients for a more equitable, relational and future‑facing R&I ecosystem. Engaged Futures provided a way to connect these signals, helping participants see how local innovations could scale, align and accumulate into broader systemic change.

The event surfaced a strong, shared message:
Public engagement is not a peripheral activity—it is foundational to the legitimacy, impact, and future sustainability of the R&I system.

Participants recognised that while promising innovations already exist, the system as a whole remains fragmented. Deep change will require:

• investment in long-term relationships
• rebalancing power
• more flexible and enabling funding
• coordinated leadership
• and a shared articulation of public value

The day ended with cautious optimism: the willingness, talent and imagination are clearly present across the system. What is needed now is alignment, structural support and political recognition to ensure that engagement becomes a durable, integrated part of how the UK delivers research and innovation for societal good.