Understanding Academic Reluctance to Recognise Lived Experience and Its Impacts

Its a sad fact thatacademic institutions in the UK, like elsewhere, often value traditional forms of knowledge (e.g., peer-reviewed research, theoretical frameworks, and quantitative data) over experiential knowledge. It would appear that academic rigor is often defined by methodologies that emphasise replicability, objectivity, and quantifiable evidence. Lived experience, being both subjective and qualitative, is frequently viewed as less reliable or generalisable. Universities often prioritise knowledge that originates within their own structures or those seen as ‘expert’ institutions, sidelining grassroots or community-based insights which is, in my opion, not in the interest of those we seek to serve. Incorporating lived experience into academic research often requires methodologies (e.g., participatory action research) that challenge traditional power dynamics, which can be administratively and methodologically challenging. Grassroots experiences, particularly those of marginalised groups, may highlight systemic failures or uncomfortable truths. Institutions may fear reputational damage or the need for significant systemic change. The reluctance to include lived experience has tangible consequences for veterans and others attempting to create needs led and person-centered support services. Excluding the voices of veterans and other service users limits understanding of their actual needs, leading to services that may be ineffective, irrelevant, or even harmful. When lived experiences are sidelined, veterans and their families may feel reduced to symbolic roles rather than being active contributors to meaningful change. Grassroots organisations, like Forward Assist which are often founded on the principles of lived experience, struggle to gain academic or institutional credibility. This limits their access to funding and partnership opportunities necessary for growth and innovation. Veterans' unique challenges (e.g., PTSD, reintegration struggles, housing issues) are often misunderstood or oversimplified. Academic neglect of their lived experiences perpetuates stereotypes and stigmas, limiting societal and policy progress. Creating needs led, person-centered support services relies heavily on understanding the nuanced, real-world experiences of those they aim to serve. Sadly, academic reluctance to recognise or validate lived experience exacerbates barriers and without robust research that integrates lived experiences, policymakers may implement top-down solutions that miss grassroots realities. Similarly, funding bodies often require evidence-based outcomes tied to academic research. This biases resources toward organisations with academic partnerships, sidelining grassroots efforts. I also think that when academic institutions don’t actively engage with grassroots charities, critical insights remain siloed. This prevents shared learning and limits systemic change. The above notwithstanding, it is my view that academic institutions should adopt and promote participatory research methods that genuinely involve service users and grassroots organisations as co-researchers and their input insight and participation should be financially renumerated. Facilitating collaborations between universities and grassroots charities could ensure a two-way exchange of knowledge, benefiting both parties and wider society. As such institutions should establish frameworks to validate lived experience as a legitimate source of knowledge, ensuring it informs teaching, research, and policy recommendations. Grassroots organisations and advocacy groups should pressure academic institutions and funding bodies to recognise and support research that promotes lived experience. By failing to recognise and promote lived experiences, academic institutions hinder the development of effective, person-centered support services. This has profound consequences for veterans and other marginalised groups who rely on grassroots charities to address gaps in formal support systems. Bridging the gap between academic research and lived experience is essential for fostering innovative solutions, addressing systemic barriers, and ensuring that services truly meet the needs of those they are designed to help.

Tony Wright CEO Forward Assist