Dr Stephen Allen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering and Associate Director of the Institute of Sustainability and Climate Change (ISCC). For more than a decade, Steve has fostered strong links with policymakers through his experiences working within Parliament for POST and now at Bath via the IPR Policy Fellowship Programme.

Tell us about your research and expertise

"My research is all about measuring and then reducing the environmental footprints in design and engineering.

"We use a method called life cycle assessment (LCA) and it is a means of understanding all the pollution caused by a product from cradle to grave; from raw material extraction, processing, and manufacturing, through to its use and eventually the disposal of the product."

How is your work relevant to policymakers?

"Often policy aims to reduce our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or broader environmental footprint. LCA helps us achieve overall reductions by considering the total quantity of GHG emissions caused both directly and indirectly with a product, such as the direct emissions from a factory and the indirect emissions of supplying energy to that factory.

"This helps us avoid ‘burden shifting’, whereby we could reduce emissions from one place while increasing them elsewhere. Moreover, full LCA considers a wide range of environmental indicators, and so ensures that as we work to reducing GHG emissions we don’t unknowingly increase other types of environmental impact, such as acidification, at the same time."

For further information see: Communicating research for policy audiences; Areas of Research Interest

How have you engaged policy professionals with your research?

"Following my PhD at Bath in 2009, I got a job at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) as an energy advisor with the goal of helping to inform policy using science. Following that, I was a consultant working with policymakers before returning to Bath. Since my return in 2018, I have engaged with policymakers from central Government Departments and Local Government.

"Recently, for example, I worked with the industry modelling team from what is now the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero, to support policy on industrial decarbonisation — this was part of our ‘UK Energy Research Centre’ project with the University of Leeds, UCL and other partners. I also recently worked with Dr Will Hawkins and colleagues, alongside a team from Bath and North East Somerset Council (BANES) on a project helping BANES to understand new planning rules they had brought in and how they could reduce the energy use and carbon footprint of buildings.

"This was a really important project both in terms of local engagement but also local policy impact." Find out more

Also see: Devolved, regional and local Government and policy engagement; Parliament and policy engagement

What methods of engagement have been most successful?

"A lot of it is about really understanding one another, talking, getting to know people, understanding what their challenges are. Then, it’s all about working out how the research that you’re doing is relevant to that context, or how it can be adapted.

"I see it as a two-way process. Sometimes, it’s advocating or telling someone about the research that you’re doing, which can affect their thinking and what they go to do next. Other times, it starts with me paying attention to what is going on in the policy world and thinking what could this mean for the next grant proposal or the future direction of my research.

"Throughout my time with POST I learnt lots about engaging policymakers — POST is a really brilliant resource for Parliamentarians. For academics wanting to engage POST, signing up to the POST newsletter is a useful first step as they share opportunities to contribute to POSTnotes and POSTbriefs. For example, a POSTbrief in 2021 on reducing the whole life carbon impact of buildings was a good opportunity for me to input my research and knowledge into the policymaking process in that area."

Also see Parliament's Libraries and POST

How have you worked with the IPR?

"The main way I have worked with the IPR is through the Policy Fellowship Programme (PFP). It is a fantastic programme and a helpful way to make connections with civil servants or other policymakers.

"Through it you meet policy fellows, share your research and expertise in response to particular policy questions or gaps they’re seeking to resolve. I also see the benefit because it keeps me in touch with the civil service, both in terms of contacts but also keeping a finger on the pulse, if you like, knowing what they’re interested in and what’s going on in central Government as otherwise that can be quite difficult to keep up. It’s a mutually beneficial exercise."

Also see IPR Policy Fellowship Programme

What has happened as a result?

"It can be difficult to keep tabs on the impact of your policy engagement work and it requires you to stay engaged over the long term and to keep abreast of latest policy developments.

"One example is when I led a POST briefing on the carbon footprint of electricity generation back in 2010-11. This was novel at the time because it was transparent about the uncertainty associated with the estimates, which was often poorly understood and communicated.

"Rather than hiding it, we made uncertainty a feature, and our transparency increased confidence in the key conclusion — that a wide range of ‘low carbon’ technologies really are low carbon compared to their fossil-fuel counterparts. At the time, there was quite a bit of debate in Parliament about reforming the electricity market and the briefing note we prepared supported this process, and led to me being seconded to a parliamentary Select Committee for an inquiry on electricity market reform.

"The briefing was used in parliamentary debates — I’ve been sent letters from the relevant Secretary of State and Ministers or their teams saying how useful the research had been — and it has also been used outside of Parliament. For example, the Climate Change Committee used the research to feed into some of their advisory reports to the Government, and a professional engineering magazine had a double-page spread summarising the research for engineering designers. It also led to further external opportunities.

"In 2013 I led a similar piece of work for WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme) and a large group of retailers to decide where to focus action reducing the environmental footprint of grocery products, and it inspired me to apply for research funding in 2021 to improve how uncertainty is dealt with in LCA in the construction sector, which itself involves further policy engagement (such as the BANES project mentioned above)."

Also see Planning for and evidencing policy impact

What have you learnt about the process of policy engagement?

"The process is very much based on people, you need to get to know the people that are involved and try to understand them as best you can. You need to understand what their issues are, what their challenges are, above solely advocating for your own research, though this can be important too.

"It’s also important to keep tabs on what the civil service or Government is planning for the upcoming Parliament, as well as what different positions people may transfer to, as you can quickly fall out of touch with the current people who are working in an area that is relevant to you. That’s one of the reasons the PFP is so helpful, because it is a way of bringing people into the University whose work is relevant to your research."

What advice would you give others?

• Pay attention to what’s going on – what consultations are coming out of Government, what Select Committee inquiries are coming out, what is the POST work programme. Find out what they’re doing and look for ways to engage with that
• Engage with POST – it’s one of the most effective ways to contribute to Parliamentary debates as an academic.
• Even if you can’t address all of a policymaker’s questions, the contributions you have to the policy questions you can address are valuable. The people issuing government consultations or select committee inquiries, for example, really value academic input on the grounds that it is typically more impartial than many of the other people who may respond to consultations.