ISSN 0004-0894 © Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2005 Area (2005) 37.2, 127–137 Blackwell Publishing, Ltd. Research relevance, ‘knowledge transfer’ and the geographies of CASE studentship collaboration David Demeritt and Loretta Lees Department of Geography, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS Email: david.demeritt@kcl.ac.uk Revised manuscript received 13 January 2005 The Co-operative Awards in Science and Engineering (CASE) studentship programme of the UK Research Councils provide one example of wider efforts internationally to encourage so-called ‘knowledge transfer’ and thereby harness publicly supported university research more closely to the goals of national competitiveness, regional economic development and local regeneration. In this paper we describe the implications of how the various UK research councils have interpreted the objectives and beneficiaries of ‘knowledge transfer’, both for the relative opportunities available to human and physical geographers for collaboration through CASE and for the sorts of values that their research must serve. Then, we draw on unpublished data from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) to explore the geographies of CASE studentship allocation and participation. The broad regional and institutional patterns of participation we describe have important implications for ongoing debates in the UK about research selectivity and the role of the university as an engine of local development, while the striking disciplinary patterns of CASE participation, and in particular the overwhelming success of geographers in this competitive programme, provide an opportunity to reassess claims about whether and for whom geographical research is relevant. Key words: collaborative research, Research Councils’ CASE studentship programme, knowledge transfer, science policy, relevance of geography Introduction Governments increasingly justify public financing of university research in terms of its immediate relevance. To take just one recent example, the European Commission’s (2004a) Communication on Science and Technology calls for research funded through the next EU Research Framework Programme to be more closely tied to ‘supporting the Union’s political objectives’. Though the ‘topics which should be given particular attention’ range widely from health and consumer protection to energy, the environment and home affairs (para. 37), the opening paragraph makes it clear that economic competitiveness is the Commission’s primary concern: Scientific research, technological development and innovation are at the heart of the knowledge-based economy, a key factor in growth, the competitiveness of companies and employment. For this reason, the Commission has made strengthening European research a major objective in its Communication on the future financial framework of the Union. (para. 1) In addition to ‘strengthening the European Research effort’, the report notes that ‘the key to European industrial competitiveness’ lies in successful com- mercialization of research findings, and in this it finds the EU wanting: Europe does not have sufficient capacity to transform knowledge into products and services, in particular