REF Panel Chairs: How Recruitment and Independence Work

REF panel chairs are the academics who lead the Research Excellence Framework’s four main panels and 34 sub-panels, setting assessment criteria, calibrating standards across institutions, and signing off outcomes. For REF 2029, Research England and the other UK funding bodies moved chair and member recruitment from a largely nomination-based system to an open application process, with the four funding bodies making final appointments and all panellists bound by the Seven Principles of Public Life. This is a governance shift, not a cosmetic one: it changes who can put themselves forward, how conflicts of interest are managed, and how independence from vested institutional interests is documented.

A REF panel chair is the individual — main panel chair or sub-panel chair — who holds final decision-making authority for their panel’s assessment outcomes, informed by the panel’s collective view but accountable to the four UK higher education funding bodies for the integrity of that decision.

• Who are the REF 2029 panel chairs?
• How are REF panel chairs recruited?
• How is chair independence vetted?
• What changed between REF 2021 and REF 2029?
• Common questions about REF panel chairs
• Implications for institutions and applicants

Who are the REF 2029 panel chairs?

REF 2029 retains the four-main-panel structure used since REF 2014, with each main panel overseeing a cluster of the 34 sub-panels aligned to individual Units of Assessment. The four main panel chairs confirmed for REF 2029 are Professor Louise Kenny (University of Liverpool) for Main Panel A — Medicine, Health and Life Sciences; Professor Tom Rodden (University of Nottingham) for Main Panel B — Physical Sciences, Engineering and Mathematics; Professor Jane Falkingham (University of Southampton) for Main Panel C — Social Sciences; and Professor Greg Walker (University of Edinburgh) for Main Panel D — Arts and Humanities.

Sub-panel chairs and deputy chairs for all 34 units were subsequently appointed by the main panel chairs working alongside REF 2029 advisory panel members, following the closure of open applications in early 2025. Each sub-panel chair leads their unit’s criteria-setting work, advises on further membership, and produces draft assessment outcomes for main panel sign-off.

How are REF panel chairs recruited?

Main panel chair recruitment for REF 2029 opened as a public application round in August 2024, with sub-panel chair and deputy chair applications closing on 6 February 2025 and other panel roles closing 28 April 2025. Applicants required the formal support of their employing institution before applying — panels are not self-nominating.

Recruitment runs in two phases tied to the REF 2029 timetable: a criteria-setting phase running until June 2026, and an assessment phase running until March 2030, including reporting. Members appointed for the criteria phase are expected to continue into the assessment phase, with a further recruitment round anticipated for assessment-only roles.

Shortlisting draws on the REF Steering Group, relevant sector and disciplinary bodies, and — once main panel chairs are in post — the chairs themselves for sub-panel appointments. The People and Diversity Advisory Panel (PDAP) and the Research Diversity Advisory Panel (RDAP) provide oversight intended to reduce bias in both shortlisting and final decisions. Final sign-off on every appointment rests with the four UK higher education funding bodies — Research England, the Scottish Funding Council, the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and the Department for the Economy, Northern Ireland — not with the panels themselves.

Time commitment across the full exercise is estimated at 40 to 60 days, split roughly one-third in the criteria phase and two-thirds during assessment. Panel fees are paid across both phases and vary by role, reflecting the differing scale of chair, deputy chair and member responsibilities.

How is chair independence vetted?

REF panels do not run a discrete, named “independence vetting” test comparable to, say, judicial appointments. Instead, independence is enforced through three overlapping mechanisms: mandatory conflict-of-interest declarations, chair-led conflict management with the option of independent review, and a binding code of conduct.

• Every appointed panel member, including chairs, must declare relevant interests — institutional, personal or financial — before taking part in assessment decisions.
• Responsibility for managing declared conflicts sits with the panel chair in the first instance, with structured guidance on when a conflicted member must recuse themselves or when a matter needs independent review.
• All panel appointees are required to conduct themselves in line with the Seven Principles of Public Life (the Nolan Principles) — selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership — a public-standards benchmark applied across UK public appointments.

This model treats independence as an ongoing governance discipline rather than a one-off checkpoint at appointment: it is exercised continuously through the criteria-setting and assessment phases, not certified once and forgotten.

What changed between REF 2021 and REF 2029?

The single biggest governance change is the shift from a largely invitation- and nomination-based process in REF 2021 to fully open competitive applications for REF 2029, covering main panel chairs, sub-panel chairs, deputy chairs and members alike. REF 2021 panel membership was built substantially through nominations channelled via institutions, learned societies and subject associations, with funding bodies then selecting from those nominee pools.

For REF 2029, Research England published a dedicated transparency statement covering main and sub-panel recruitment, and explicitly framed the open-application model as a mechanism to widen the applicant pool, reduce reliance on existing academic networks, and improve representation by career stage, discipline, institution type and UK nation. Applicants no longer need an existing relationship with a nominating body to be considered — though they still require institutional support to apply.

A second, related change is the explicit advisory role given to PDAP and RDAP throughout shortlisting, rather than diversity oversight being folded informally into main panel chair discretion, as was more typical in 2021. Together these changes represent a deliberate move to make the governance of who assesses UK research — not just the assessment criteria themselves — more auditable and less dependent on informal sponsorship.

Common questions about REF panel chairs

Who appoints REF panel chairs?

The four UK higher education funding bodies — Research England, the Scottish Funding Council, the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales and the Department for the Economy, Northern Ireland — make the final appointment decision for main panel chairs. Sub-panel chairs are then appointed by the main panel chairs working with REF 2029 advisory panel members.

How many REF panels are there and who leads them?

REF 2029 has four main panels (A, B, C, D) and 34 sub-panels, one per Unit of Assessment. Each main panel has a single chair with overall leadership, and each sub-panel has its own chair and at least one deputy chair reporting into the relevant main panel.

How does the REF handle conflicts of interest for chairs?

Panel chairs are responsible for identifying and managing declared conflicts of interest within their own panel, guided by structured REF decision-making rules. Mitigation can include recusal from specific decisions or referral to an independent review process where a conflict cannot be adequately managed internally.

Can any academic apply to chair a REF sub-panel?

Eligibility is open to researchers with relevant disciplinary standing and leadership experience, but every application requires the formal support of the applicant’s employing institution. Shortlisting is evidence-based against published criteria, not restricted to previously nominated candidates.

Implications for institutions and applicants

For research administrators, institutional support for a chair or panel-member application is now a distinct internal process, separate from any prior relationship with a nominating learned society. Institutions wanting representation on main or sub-panels need to track application windows directly rather than relying on being approached.

For the wider sector, the open-application model combined with PDAP/RDAP oversight and explicit conflict-of-interest management is a test case in whether procedural transparency changes who ends up chairing national research assessment panels — answerable only once REF 2029’s assessment-phase outcomes are published and compared against REF 2021’s panel composition.

Assessment-phase reporting runs into 2030, so the full governance record — chair decisions, conflict-of-interest cases, and any independent reviews triggered — will not be visible until well after the current recruitment round closes. Institutions and applicants now sit inside a genuinely new accountability structure, not a relabelled version of 2021’s.