This paper introduces a novel perspective on co-production of authoritative knowledge in environmental policy, shifting focus from perceived flaws in knowledge production to structural and governance challenges impeding knowledge uptake. It argues that these challenges, including diminishing support for public authority and widespread enthusiasm for collaboration, contribute to regulatory capacity deficits, which undermine knowledge claims’ authority. This account is tested through case study analysis of policy stakeholders in Colorado, USA, who sought to co-produce a scientific assessment for biodiversity offsetting. Despite repeated efforts, industry stakeholders disengaged twice, leading to abandonment of the policy initiative. Analysis demonstrates regulatory capacity’s crucial role in fostering co-production and integration of authoritative scientific knowledge in policymaking. By analyzing the failure to sustain stakeholder engagement in terms of interplay between regulatory capacity and co-production, this study contributes a critique of mainstream co-production and demonstrates the value of analyzing how institutional arrangements shape knowledge and policy integration.
{"title":"The limits of co-production: linking regulatory capacity to co-production of authoritative knowledge for environmental policy","authors":"Daniel Large","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae038","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces a novel perspective on co-production of authoritative knowledge in environmental policy, shifting focus from perceived flaws in knowledge production to structural and governance challenges impeding knowledge uptake. It argues that these challenges, including diminishing support for public authority and widespread enthusiasm for collaboration, contribute to regulatory capacity deficits, which undermine knowledge claims’ authority. This account is tested through case study analysis of policy stakeholders in Colorado, USA, who sought to co-produce a scientific assessment for biodiversity offsetting. Despite repeated efforts, industry stakeholders disengaged twice, leading to abandonment of the policy initiative. Analysis demonstrates regulatory capacity’s crucial role in fostering co-production and integration of authoritative scientific knowledge in policymaking. By analyzing the failure to sustain stakeholder engagement in terms of interplay between regulatory capacity and co-production, this study contributes a critique of mainstream co-production and demonstrates the value of analyzing how institutional arrangements shape knowledge and policy integration.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141569596","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}
Universities play a crucial role in the creation and promotion of academic spin-offs, which is why public funding programmes are implemented to improve start-up support there. So far, however, there has been little robust evidence as to whether such programmes actually improve start-up support mechanisms at universities. Against this backdrop, the present study makes a contribution by examining the effects of a large German university funding programme entitled ‘EXIST—Potentials’ on the start-up support of the funded universities. Using an indicator that measures start-up support at universities very broadly and employing a before-and-after comparison group design, reliable results on the effectiveness of the programme are presented. The findings suggest that the programme is effective in improving start-up support mechanisms at universities.
{"title":"Effectiveness of targeted public university funding on universities’ start-up support: evidence from ‘EXIST—Potentials’","authors":"Christoph E Mueller, Iris Eckardt","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae039","url":null,"abstract":"Universities play a crucial role in the creation and promotion of academic spin-offs, which is why public funding programmes are implemented to improve start-up support there. So far, however, there has been little robust evidence as to whether such programmes actually improve start-up support mechanisms at universities. Against this backdrop, the present study makes a contribution by examining the effects of a large German university funding programme entitled ‘EXIST—Potentials’ on the start-up support of the funded universities. Using an indicator that measures start-up support at universities very broadly and employing a before-and-after comparison group design, reliable results on the effectiveness of the programme are presented. The findings suggest that the programme is effective in improving start-up support mechanisms at universities.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141569597","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}
Pablo Morales, Meindert Flikkema, Carolina Castaldi, Ard-Pieter de Man
Effective innovation policymaking critically relies on monitoring innovation. An emerging literature suggests that trademarks could help measure a larger share of innovations than when only utilizing patents, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This study establishes when trademarks improve the measurement of innovation compared to solely relying on patents as innovation metrics, by examining the propensity to use trademarks for non-patented innovations from SMEs. We collected multiple original samples of innovations from Dutch SMEs and assessed the extent to which trademarks and/or patents were filed for those innovations. Our results show that trademarks can improve innovation measurement for SMEs, particularly in scale-intensive and supplier-dominated industries and in some service industries—areas where patent propensities are low. Our results bear implications for monitoring innovation and evaluating science, research, and innovation policy. Overall, by combining trademark and patent data, the number of measured innovations by SMEs increases approximately by a relative of 51.8 per cent.
{"title":"When do trademarks improve the measurement of innovation? An analysis of innovations from Dutch SMEs","authors":"Pablo Morales, Meindert Flikkema, Carolina Castaldi, Ard-Pieter de Man","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae035","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Effective innovation policymaking critically relies on monitoring innovation. An emerging literature suggests that trademarks could help measure a larger share of innovations than when only utilizing patents, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This study establishes when trademarks improve the measurement of innovation compared to solely relying on patents as innovation metrics, by examining the propensity to use trademarks for non-patented innovations from SMEs. We collected multiple original samples of innovations from Dutch SMEs and assessed the extent to which trademarks and/or patents were filed for those innovations. Our results show that trademarks can improve innovation measurement for SMEs, particularly in scale-intensive and supplier-dominated industries and in some service industries—areas where patent propensities are low. Our results bear implications for monitoring innovation and evaluating science, research, and innovation policy. Overall, by combining trademark and patent data, the number of measured innovations by SMEs increases approximately by a relative of 51.8 per cent.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141342488","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}
M. Norn, K. Aagaard, Josefine Bjørnholm, A. K. Stage
Research funding instruments are increasingly targeted towards research that can contribute to solutions of complex societal challenges. How funders in practice seek to steer research towards addressing such challenges is, however, not well understood. This study explores how public, challenge-oriented funding instruments from three Northern European countries have been designed and deployed to steer funded research in desired directions. Our findings shed light on the practical levers that public funders use to influence research. The study also illustrates how these efforts are influenced by differences in their governance as well as in the choices they make about how to balance aims of promoting research excellence with aims of steering research towards other desired means and ends (e.g. economic and societal impact). Our findings highlight dilemmas and trade-offs in funders’ targeting efforts to influence the direction and outcomes of research, which ultimately influence the success of such efforts.
{"title":"Funder strategies for promoting research addressing societal challenges: thematic, impact, and collaboration targeting","authors":"M. Norn, K. Aagaard, Josefine Bjørnholm, A. K. Stage","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae033","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Research funding instruments are increasingly targeted towards research that can contribute to solutions of complex societal challenges. How funders in practice seek to steer research towards addressing such challenges is, however, not well understood. This study explores how public, challenge-oriented funding instruments from three Northern European countries have been designed and deployed to steer funded research in desired directions. Our findings shed light on the practical levers that public funders use to influence research. The study also illustrates how these efforts are influenced by differences in their governance as well as in the choices they make about how to balance aims of promoting research excellence with aims of steering research towards other desired means and ends (e.g. economic and societal impact). Our findings highlight dilemmas and trade-offs in funders’ targeting efforts to influence the direction and outcomes of research, which ultimately influence the success of such efforts.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141372153","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}
Rik B Braams, Joeri H Wesseling, Albert J Meijer, Marko P Hekkert
The literature on societal transitions offers many policy recommendations. The implicit assumption is that the civil servants can follow these recommendations and design policies to accelerate transitions. This article shows that governmental transformation is needed to enable civil servants to act upon these, which is currently far from straightforward due to institutional constraints. We used a research-by-design approach with four design groups of civil servants working on transitions within a Dutch ministry. By studying how they interacted and designed alternative scenarios for resolving real-life, deeply rooted institutional constraints, we identified twelve preliminary institutional conditions for a government working on sustainability transitions. The institutional conditions relate to working with uncertainty, implementing operational management, implementing interdependent stewardship, and detaching from the current system.
{"title":"Institutional conditions for governments working on sustainability transitions","authors":"Rik B Braams, Joeri H Wesseling, Albert J Meijer, Marko P Hekkert","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae028","url":null,"abstract":"The literature on societal transitions offers many policy recommendations. The implicit assumption is that the civil servants can follow these recommendations and design policies to accelerate transitions. This article shows that governmental transformation is needed to enable civil servants to act upon these, which is currently far from straightforward due to institutional constraints. We used a research-by-design approach with four design groups of civil servants working on transitions within a Dutch ministry. By studying how they interacted and designed alternative scenarios for resolving real-life, deeply rooted institutional constraints, we identified twelve preliminary institutional conditions for a government working on sustainability transitions. The institutional conditions relate to working with uncertainty, implementing operational management, implementing interdependent stewardship, and detaching from the current system.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141190370","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}
Modern manufacturing entails disparate technologies that function as whole ‘technology systems’ to produce specified outcomes. These technologies have unique technical attributes, requiring distinctly different policy responses. Despite this, there are concerns that industrial policy initiatives in advanced economies are deficient in their consideration of technology systems. To scrutinize these issues, an evolutionary typology of the technologies constituting technology systems is elucidated and applied across three initiatives—Germany’s Industrie 4.0, the US’ Smart Manufacturing, and the UK’s High-Value Manufacturing. The findings suggest that Industrie 4.0 is more comprehensive in its treatment of technology systems. This is due to the influence of a systems-level policy vision that guides the targeting of specific technologies. This vision is executed through a range of policy instruments and institutions, each fulfilling unique complementary and cumulative roles. The paper offers new insights into the significance of policy vision and its systematic implementation.
{"title":"Industrial policy initiatives in manufacturing: Examining cross-country interventions through an evolutionary typology of technology systems","authors":"Tausif Bordoloi, Philip Shapira, Paul Mativenga","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae026","url":null,"abstract":"Modern manufacturing entails disparate technologies that function as whole ‘technology systems’ to produce specified outcomes. These technologies have unique technical attributes, requiring distinctly different policy responses. Despite this, there are concerns that industrial policy initiatives in advanced economies are deficient in their consideration of technology systems. To scrutinize these issues, an evolutionary typology of the technologies constituting technology systems is elucidated and applied across three initiatives—Germany’s Industrie 4.0, the US’ Smart Manufacturing, and the UK’s High-Value Manufacturing. The findings suggest that Industrie 4.0 is more comprehensive in its treatment of technology systems. This is due to the influence of a systems-level policy vision that guides the targeting of specific technologies. This vision is executed through a range of policy instruments and institutions, each fulfilling unique complementary and cumulative roles. The paper offers new insights into the significance of policy vision and its systematic implementation.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141190372","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}
Scientists are increasingly specializing to manage the vast knowledge bases within their domains, making knowledge-sharing strategies essential for scientific progress. Among these strategies, international scientific collaboration has increased markedly. We analyse the role of thematic specialization as one of its drivers in the context of Chagas research, a neglected disease. Since there is a strong research tradition in Latin America on this topic, it is an interesting context to study centre-periphery research dynamics. Using a novel bibliometric database on Chagas research during 1990–2019, we exploit its panel structure in a gravity-type econometric model. The findings show that the degree of specialization and its proximity among partners boost joint publications. Both effects are particularly important for country dyads involving authors from the periphery linked to authors in the centre. This paper is the first empirical study to assess the role of specialization as a driver of international scientific collaboration.
{"title":"The role of thematic specialization in international scientific collaboration: the case of Chagas research","authors":"Emanuel López, Valeria Arza","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae017","url":null,"abstract":"Scientists are increasingly specializing to manage the vast knowledge bases within their domains, making knowledge-sharing strategies essential for scientific progress. Among these strategies, international scientific collaboration has increased markedly. We analyse the role of thematic specialization as one of its drivers in the context of Chagas research, a neglected disease. Since there is a strong research tradition in Latin America on this topic, it is an interesting context to study centre-periphery research dynamics. Using a novel bibliometric database on Chagas research during 1990–2019, we exploit its panel structure in a gravity-type econometric model. The findings show that the degree of specialization and its proximity among partners boost joint publications. Both effects are particularly important for country dyads involving authors from the periphery linked to authors in the centre. This paper is the first empirical study to assess the role of specialization as a driver of international scientific collaboration.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140928007","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}
Helka Kalliomäki, Johanna Kalliokoski, Thomas Woodson, Leena Kunttu, Jari Kuusisto
This paper scrutinizes the objective of inclusion in contemporary science, technology, and innovation (STI) policies by analyzing its manifestations within the broad STI policy language promoting a closer interaction between science and society. We contribute to the STI policy literature by revisiting current conceptualizations that primarily center on marginalized groups. By analyzing the Broader Impacts Criterion and Responsible Research and Innovation frameworks in the USA and the European Union, we show that inclusion in the context of high-income countries is partially decoupling from marginalization and increasingly being instrumentalized to serve impact agendas. Our conceptual framework synthesizing the dimensions of goal setting and agency illustrates the broadening scope of inclusive policies and the emergent decoupling dilemma that has been neglected in the literature. Future research must account for the growing ambiguity of policy language that is facing new legitimacy questions and the blurring of objectives focused on supporting marginalized groups.
本文仔细研究了当代科学、技术和创新（STI）政策中的包容目标，分析了其在促进科学与社会之间更紧密互动的广泛STI政策语言中的表现形式。我们重新审视了当前主要以边缘化群体为中心的概念，为科技创新政策文献做出了贡献。通过分析美国和欧盟的 "更广泛的影响标准"（Broader Impacts Criterion）和 "负责任的研究与创新"（Responsible Research and Innovation）框架，我们表明，在高收入国家，包容性正在部分地与边缘化脱钩，并越来越多地被用来服务于影响议程。我们的概念框架综合了目标设定和代理两个维度，说明了全纳政策的范围不断扩大，以及文献中一直被忽视的新出现的脱钩困境。未来的研究必须考虑到政策语言日益模糊的问题，即面临新的合法性问题，以及以支持边缘化群体为重点的目标模糊不清的问题。
{"title":"Inclusion as a science, technology, and innovation policy objective in high-income countries: the decoupling dilemma","authors":"Helka Kalliomäki, Johanna Kalliokoski, Thomas Woodson, Leena Kunttu, Jari Kuusisto","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae019","url":null,"abstract":"This paper scrutinizes the objective of inclusion in contemporary science, technology, and innovation (STI) policies by analyzing its manifestations within the broad STI policy language promoting a closer interaction between science and society. We contribute to the STI policy literature by revisiting current conceptualizations that primarily center on marginalized groups. By analyzing the Broader Impacts Criterion and Responsible Research and Innovation frameworks in the USA and the European Union, we show that inclusion in the context of high-income countries is partially decoupling from marginalization and increasingly being instrumentalized to serve impact agendas. Our conceptual framework synthesizing the dimensions of goal setting and agency illustrates the broadening scope of inclusive policies and the emergent decoupling dilemma that has been neglected in the literature. Future research must account for the growing ambiguity of policy language that is facing new legitimacy questions and the blurring of objectives focused on supporting marginalized groups.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140928017","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 presence of non-Arctic and non-European countries in the Arctic has been growing over the past two decades. Given the geographic distance of these countries from the polar region, their presence in the High North may seem surprising. In this article, we study the presence in Svalbard of scientists from different origins and how they interact through an analysis of the field missions in which they are involved. Combining network analysis and interviews, we highlight the role of the stations located in the archipelago for access to the field and the cooperation strategies of scientists, including those from countries that do not have stations above the Arctic Circle. We tackle issues of integration in this area by empirically discussing three logics: (1) scientific autonomy, (2) core-periphery structure, and (3) regional patterns of cooperation, thus going beyond an approach strictly limited to the analysis of science diplomacy policies.
{"title":"Field science and scientific collaboration in the Svalbard Archipelago: beyond science diplomacy","authors":"Mayline Strouk, Marion Maisonobe","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae012","url":null,"abstract":"The presence of non-Arctic and non-European countries in the Arctic has been growing over the past two decades. Given the geographic distance of these countries from the polar region, their presence in the High North may seem surprising. In this article, we study the presence in Svalbard of scientists from different origins and how they interact through an analysis of the field missions in which they are involved. Combining network analysis and interviews, we highlight the role of the stations located in the archipelago for access to the field and the cooperation strategies of scientists, including those from countries that do not have stations above the Arctic Circle. We tackle issues of integration in this area by empirically discussing three logics: (1) scientific autonomy, (2) core-periphery structure, and (3) regional patterns of cooperation, thus going beyond an approach strictly limited to the analysis of science diplomacy policies.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140889781","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}
Jet Bakker, Peter Scholten, Jan Fransen, Ellen Minkman
This paper provides insight into how the conceptualization of urban knowledge sharing has developed. Based on a structured review and categorization of the literature, we identify three forms of knowledge sharing in and between cities that are distinctly different: knowledge transfer, knowledge exchange, and knowledge co-creation. We find that the three forms have different boosts and barriers, whereby the complexities of knowledge sharing and hence the capacities required of the actors are lowest for knowledge transfer and highest for knowledge co-creation. We would therefore like to qualify the recent emphasis given in literature to co-creation; with its complexities and required capacities, it is not to be considered a panacea for solving all urban problems. We propose a model within which knowledge transfer and exchange are more suitable for less wicked problems and may sometimes fruitfully reduce complexities.
{"title":"A typology of urban knowledge sharing: from a systematic literature review to an integrated model","authors":"Jet Bakker, Peter Scholten, Jan Fransen, Ellen Minkman","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae008","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides insight into how the conceptualization of urban knowledge sharing has developed. Based on a structured review and categorization of the literature, we identify three forms of knowledge sharing in and between cities that are distinctly different: knowledge transfer, knowledge exchange, and knowledge co-creation. We find that the three forms have different boosts and barriers, whereby the complexities of knowledge sharing and hence the capacities required of the actors are lowest for knowledge transfer and highest for knowledge co-creation. We would therefore like to qualify the recent emphasis given in literature to co-creation; with its complexities and required capacities, it is not to be considered a panacea for solving all urban problems. We propose a model within which knowledge transfer and exchange are more suitable for less wicked problems and may sometimes fruitfully reduce complexities.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140596262","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：