Transformative innovation policy (TIP) implies not only new directionality for innovation policy but also rethinking its means and scope. This requires further investigation into the role of horizontal and cross-sectoral policy programmes that may be relevant for upscaling innovation and destabilising regimes. This paper studies the national implementation, in Finland, of the European Union (EU) programme for COVID-19 recovery, the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), as an example of a cross-sectoral policy programme. It is of interest, because the EU has set certain conditions related to sustainability transitions for the RRF. Using a transformative policy mix approach, the paper finds that the Finnish RRF Programme lists many policy measures that can be regarded as having a transformative intent. These include upscaling innovative sustainability niches and destabilising existing practices. Yet, we also found that there is a risk that cross-sectoral programmes fail to find overall transformative visions and fund multiple potentially competing technological pathways instead.
{"title":"Analysis of COVID-19 recovery and resilience policy in Finland: a transformative policy mix approach","authors":"Paula Kivimaa, J. Lukkarinen, D. Lazarevic","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Transformative innovation policy (TIP) implies not only new directionality for innovation policy but also rethinking its means and scope. This requires further investigation into the role of horizontal and cross-sectoral policy programmes that may be relevant for upscaling innovation and destabilising regimes. This paper studies the national implementation, in Finland, of the European Union (EU) programme for COVID-19 recovery, the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), as an example of a cross-sectoral policy programme. It is of interest, because the EU has set certain conditions related to sustainability transitions for the RRF. Using a transformative policy mix approach, the paper finds that the Finnish RRF Programme lists many policy measures that can be regarded as having a transformative intent. These include upscaling innovative sustainability niches and destabilising existing practices. Yet, we also found that there is a risk that cross-sectoral programmes fail to find overall transformative visions and fund multiple potentially competing technological pathways instead.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43726451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is generally agreed that researchers’ ‘local context’ matters to the successful implementation of research integrity policies. However, it often remains unclear what the relevant local context is. Is it the institutions and immediate working surroundings of researchers? Or, do we need to pay more attention to researchers’ epistemic communities if we want to understand their ‘local context’? In this paper, we examine this question by using the International Research Integrity Survey with more than 60,000 respondents. Survey responses indicate that academics identify with both their geographical local units (‘polis’) and their more transnational epistemic or scholarly communities (‘cosmos’). Identification with scholarly communities tends to be strongest. We embed the survey results in the academic literature by proposing a theoretical understanding of academics’ ‘local context’ based on Beck’s notion of cosmopolitanism and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. We conclude with considerations on how to successfully implement research integrity policies.
{"title":"Disentangling the local context—imagined communities and researchers’ sense of belonging","authors":"Serge Horbach, M. P. Sørensen, N. Allum, A. Reid","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 It is generally agreed that researchers’ ‘local context’ matters to the successful implementation of research integrity policies. However, it often remains unclear what the relevant local context is. Is it the institutions and immediate working surroundings of researchers? Or, do we need to pay more attention to researchers’ epistemic communities if we want to understand their ‘local context’? In this paper, we examine this question by using the International Research Integrity Survey with more than 60,000 respondents. Survey responses indicate that academics identify with both their geographical local units (‘polis’) and their more transnational epistemic or scholarly communities (‘cosmos’). Identification with scholarly communities tends to be strongest. We embed the survey results in the academic literature by proposing a theoretical understanding of academics’ ‘local context’ based on Beck’s notion of cosmopolitanism and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. We conclude with considerations on how to successfully implement research integrity policies.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49011146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In their efforts to affect policy change, policy entrepreneurs employ a series of strategies, which have been well documented in the literature. However, little is known regarding the relationship between the types of strategies policy entrepreneurs use and the institutional contexts in which they operate. The Interreg Europe programme aims to promote policy changes and thus offers a space for policy learning and experimentation to policy entrepreneurs. Using a mixed methodology that includes a survey addressed to the sixty-five Interreg Europe projects in research and innovation during the programming period 2014–20 and twelve follow-up semi-structured interviews, this article explores the strategies used by policy entrepreneurs in different institutional contexts. The study, rare in the policy entrepreneurship scholarship with its quantitative aspects, highlights the most widely-used strategies by policy entrepreneurs in research and innovation policy changes. Findings suggest that the strategy of storytelling is more widely used in high-innovator regions than in low-innovator regions and in Northern European regions compared to Southern European regions. Moreover, policy entrepreneurs who employ the storytelling strategy find it easier to introduce a policy change.
{"title":"Policy entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial strategies, and institutional contexts in Interreg Europe","authors":"Arnault Morisson, E. Petridou","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In their efforts to affect policy change, policy entrepreneurs employ a series of strategies, which have been well documented in the literature. However, little is known regarding the relationship between the types of strategies policy entrepreneurs use and the institutional contexts in which they operate. The Interreg Europe programme aims to promote policy changes and thus offers a space for policy learning and experimentation to policy entrepreneurs. Using a mixed methodology that includes a survey addressed to the sixty-five Interreg Europe projects in research and innovation during the programming period 2014–20 and twelve follow-up semi-structured interviews, this article explores the strategies used by policy entrepreneurs in different institutional contexts. The study, rare in the policy entrepreneurship scholarship with its quantitative aspects, highlights the most widely-used strategies by policy entrepreneurs in research and innovation policy changes. Findings suggest that the strategy of storytelling is more widely used in high-innovator regions than in low-innovator regions and in Northern European regions compared to Southern European regions. Moreover, policy entrepreneurs who employ the storytelling strategy find it easier to introduce a policy change.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43674729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The exact nature of industrial/innovation (I/I) policy challenges and the best way to address them are unknown ex ante. This requires a degree of experimentation, which can be problematic in the context of an accountable public administration and leaves the question of how to reconcile the experimental nature of I/I policy with the need for public accountability, a crucial but unresolved issue. The trade-off between experimentation and accountability requires a governance model that will allow continuous feedback loops among the various stakeholders and ongoing evaluation of and adjustments to activities as programmes are implemented. We propose an ‘action learning’ approach, incorporating the governance mechanism of ‘learning networks’ to handle the problems of implementing experimental governance of new and untried I/I policies. We resolve the issue of accountability by drawing on the literature on network governance in public policy. By integrating control and learning dimensions of accountability, this approach enables us to resolve conceptually and empirically trade-offs between the need for experimentation and accountability in I/I policy.
{"title":"The experimentation–accountability trade-off in innovation and industrial policy: are learning networks the solution?","authors":"S. Radosevic, Despina Kanellou, G. Tsekouras","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The exact nature of industrial/innovation (I/I) policy challenges and the best way to address them are unknown ex ante. This requires a degree of experimentation, which can be problematic in the context of an accountable public administration and leaves the question of how to reconcile the experimental nature of I/I policy with the need for public accountability, a crucial but unresolved issue. The trade-off between experimentation and accountability requires a governance model that will allow continuous feedback loops among the various stakeholders and ongoing evaluation of and adjustments to activities as programmes are implemented. We propose an ‘action learning’ approach, incorporating the governance mechanism of ‘learning networks’ to handle the problems of implementing experimental governance of new and untried I/I policies. We resolve the issue of accountability by drawing on the literature on network governance in public policy. By integrating control and learning dimensions of accountability, this approach enables us to resolve conceptually and empirically trade-offs between the need for experimentation and accountability in I/I policy.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47800166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Diego R. de Moraes Silva, Nicholas S. Vonortas, A. Furtado
This article investigates the effect of financial and non-financial barriers on innovativeness. Using microdata from Brazil, it provides a rare detailed empirical investigation of this type in developing countries. The analysis is based on a novel conceptual framework of the moderating role of barriers to innovation. Research and development expenditure and informal methods of intellectual property protection are the innovation determinants least affected by obstacles to innovation. This is in sharp contrast to company size, whose effect appeared quite sensitive to barriers of all kinds. Disembodied and embodied knowledge outsourcing interact differently with different constraints: while the former appeared helpful in working around different types of barriers in low-tech sectors, the latter was more useful in addressing financial constraints in high-tech sectors. Finally, cooperation with other firms was negatively affected by obstacles when firms seek more radical innovations, whereas cooperation with research and education organizations proved attractive for companies facing organizational constraints.
{"title":"Barriers as moderators in the innovation process","authors":"Diego R. de Moraes Silva, Nicholas S. Vonortas, A. Furtado","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article investigates the effect of financial and non-financial barriers on innovativeness. Using microdata from Brazil, it provides a rare detailed empirical investigation of this type in developing countries. The analysis is based on a novel conceptual framework of the moderating role of barriers to innovation. Research and development expenditure and informal methods of intellectual property protection are the innovation determinants least affected by obstacles to innovation. This is in sharp contrast to company size, whose effect appeared quite sensitive to barriers of all kinds. Disembodied and embodied knowledge outsourcing interact differently with different constraints: while the former appeared helpful in working around different types of barriers in low-tech sectors, the latter was more useful in addressing financial constraints in high-tech sectors. Finally, cooperation with other firms was negatively affected by obstacles when firms seek more radical innovations, whereas cooperation with research and education organizations proved attractive for companies facing organizational constraints.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48351670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rebecca Abma-Schouten, Joey Gijbels, W. Reijmerink, I. Meijer
Panel peer review is widely used to decide which research proposals receive funding. Through this exploratory observational study at two large biomedical and health research funders in the Netherlands, we gain insight into how scientific quality and societal relevance are discussed in panel meetings. We explore, in ten review panel meetings of biomedical and health funding programmes, how panel composition and formal assessment criteria affect the arguments used. We observe that more scientific arguments are used than arguments related to societal relevance and expected impact. Also, more diverse panels result in a wider range of arguments, largely for the benefit of arguments related to societal relevance and impact. We discuss how funders can contribute to the quality of peer review by creating a shared conceptual framework that better defines research quality and societal relevance. We also contribute to a further understanding of the role of diverse peer review panels.
{"title":"Evaluation of research proposals by peer review panels: broader panels for broader assessments?","authors":"Rebecca Abma-Schouten, Joey Gijbels, W. Reijmerink, I. Meijer","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Panel peer review is widely used to decide which research proposals receive funding. Through this exploratory observational study at two large biomedical and health research funders in the Netherlands, we gain insight into how scientific quality and societal relevance are discussed in panel meetings. We explore, in ten review panel meetings of biomedical and health funding programmes, how panel composition and formal assessment criteria affect the arguments used. We observe that more scientific arguments are used than arguments related to societal relevance and expected impact. Also, more diverse panels result in a wider range of arguments, largely for the benefit of arguments related to societal relevance and impact. We discuss how funders can contribute to the quality of peer review by creating a shared conceptual framework that better defines research quality and societal relevance. We also contribute to a further understanding of the role of diverse peer review panels.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47456661","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As the national and supranational levels of government embrace the concept of missions to solve wicked problems, the importance of understanding how missions move from one level of governance to another becomes essential. In this paper, we present a comparative case analysis of evolving regional biogas systems to consider how global missions on climate action are enacted in local practice. Referring to wickedness in terms of contestation, complexity, and uncertainty of both problems and solutions, we examine how such framings affect the operationalisation of the missions. Our results indicate that in the process of local translation, wickedness often increases, but additional wickedness does not always worsen the outcomes.
{"title":"From global climate goals to local practice—mission-oriented policy enactment in three Swedish regions","authors":"Nancy Brett, T. Magnusson, Hans G. Andersson","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 As the national and supranational levels of government embrace the concept of missions to solve wicked problems, the importance of understanding how missions move from one level of governance to another becomes essential. In this paper, we present a comparative case analysis of evolving regional biogas systems to consider how global missions on climate action are enacted in local practice. Referring to wickedness in terms of contestation, complexity, and uncertainty of both problems and solutions, we examine how such framings affect the operationalisation of the missions. Our results indicate that in the process of local translation, wickedness often increases, but additional wickedness does not always worsen the outcomes.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44481722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to: Open science–related policies in Europe","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47978658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Centres of excellence (CoEs), as boundary-spanning structures between universities and firms, have been promoted and studied mainly in developed countries, while some Latin American countries have recently launched CoE programmes. This study explores how CoEs in Chile and Peru have been working in terms of their internal structures and interactions. It draws upon a conceptual framework that encompasses the distinction between contexts for and channels of university–industry linkages (UILs), the defining features of CoEs, their differences with other schemes and innovation intermediaries, and the patterns shown by CoEs in developed countries. Applying this framework to analyse two CoEs, we found that these fit into the concept of contexts for UILs and differ substantially from research and technology organisations. We also found that Chilean and Peruvian CoEs share certain commonalities with their counterparts in developed countries, albeit they also show sharp differences, which have both academic and policy implications.
{"title":"Centres of excellence in Latin America: how do these differ from other experiences?","authors":"P. G. Corilloclla Terbullino","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Centres of excellence (CoEs), as boundary-spanning structures between universities and firms, have been promoted and studied mainly in developed countries, while some Latin American countries have recently launched CoE programmes. This study explores how CoEs in Chile and Peru have been working in terms of their internal structures and interactions. It draws upon a conceptual framework that encompasses the distinction between contexts for and channels of university–industry linkages (UILs), the defining features of CoEs, their differences with other schemes and innovation intermediaries, and the patterns shown by CoEs in developed countries. Applying this framework to analyse two CoEs, we found that these fit into the concept of contexts for UILs and differ substantially from research and technology organisations. We also found that Chilean and Peruvian CoEs share certain commonalities with their counterparts in developed countries, albeit they also show sharp differences, which have both academic and policy implications.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43956807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper studies the accumulation of financial resources in higher education. Its focus lies on the Quality Pact for Teaching (QPT), a large-scale funding programme that aimed to improve the quality of tertiary education in Germany. Starting in 2011, the QPT allocated almost 2 billion euros over a 10-year period. Yet, unlike prior national funding schemes, the QPT was strongly inspired by New Public Management measures and marked the first time that a substantial amount of teaching grants was awarded in a competitive manner. My estimations show that institutions with a successful history of acquiring third-party funds coped best under these novel circumstances, thus revealing a clear pattern of cumulative advantage. Although typically dedicated to research purposes, the level of previous third-party funding emerges as a strong predictor of QPT success. Therefore, it appears that the QPT unintentionally contributed to steeper financial gaps in Germany’s academic landscape.
{"title":"A new facet of cumulative advantage in higher education finance","authors":"L. Herberholz","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scac083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac083","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper studies the accumulation of financial resources in higher education. Its focus lies on the Quality Pact for Teaching (QPT), a large-scale funding programme that aimed to improve the quality of tertiary education in Germany. Starting in 2011, the QPT allocated almost 2 billion euros over a 10-year period. Yet, unlike prior national funding schemes, the QPT was strongly inspired by New Public Management measures and marked the first time that a substantial amount of teaching grants was awarded in a competitive manner. My estimations show that institutions with a successful history of acquiring third-party funds coped best under these novel circumstances, thus revealing a clear pattern of cumulative advantage. Although typically dedicated to research purposes, the level of previous third-party funding emerges as a strong predictor of QPT success. Therefore, it appears that the QPT unintentionally contributed to steeper financial gaps in Germany’s academic landscape.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42693489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：