Abstract Lists of endorsed and discouraged scholarly publications recently emerged as an important transition in Chinese journal evaluation. Among the targeted users of these lists are researchers, who are to avoid publishing in discouraged journals and focus efforts on endorsed journals. However, it is unclear how these lists affect researchers’ valuations when choosing publication outlets. This explorative study investigates the reception of such journal lists in Chinese scientists’ research practices. Our findings suggest that three logics interact in respondents’ journal valuations: institutional evaluation regimes, differing epistemic cultures, and the influence of the commercial publishing industry. The reactive effects of both endorsed and discouraged journal lists appear to differ with the ranking status of universities, the seniority of scholars, and research fields. Apart from the new institutional evaluation regimes in this interplay, there appear to be more predominant factors than journal lists that inform publishing choices: quantitative indicators, publishers’ branding, epistemic cultures, and editorial procedures and publishing models.
{"title":"Listing quality: Chinese journal lists in incoherent valuation regimes","authors":"Jing Wang, Willem Halffman, Serge P J M Horbach","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad052","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Lists of endorsed and discouraged scholarly publications recently emerged as an important transition in Chinese journal evaluation. Among the targeted users of these lists are researchers, who are to avoid publishing in discouraged journals and focus efforts on endorsed journals. However, it is unclear how these lists affect researchers’ valuations when choosing publication outlets. This explorative study investigates the reception of such journal lists in Chinese scientists’ research practices. Our findings suggest that three logics interact in respondents’ journal valuations: institutional evaluation regimes, differing epistemic cultures, and the influence of the commercial publishing industry. The reactive effects of both endorsed and discouraged journal lists appear to differ with the ranking status of universities, the seniority of scholars, and research fields. Apart from the new institutional evaluation regimes in this interplay, there appear to be more predominant factors than journal lists that inform publishing choices: quantitative indicators, publishers’ branding, epistemic cultures, and editorial procedures and publishing models.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134972149","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: Making sense of knowledge-brokering organisations: boundary organisations or policy entrepreneurs?","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad053","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48072500","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 presents the rationale for a four-asset growth policy model, which the US economy has executed only on a partial and intermittent basis over the past four decades. The need for such a model is driven by (1) growing global competition, (2) resulting slower gross domestic product and personal income growth, and (3) a consequent rise in income inequality. Without a more effective growth model to both broaden and deepen the role of technology, declining growth and its skewed distribution among income classes will perpetuate current social and political unrest. To achieve both broader and deeper technology-based growth across the economy, the proposed technology element model specifies the four major asset categories that characterize technology-based economic development, which combine to drive more effective growth policy analysis and development.
{"title":"A four-asset technology-based growth policy","authors":"G. Tassey","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad039","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper presents the rationale for a four-asset growth policy model, which the US economy has executed only on a partial and intermittent basis over the past four decades. The need for such a model is driven by (1) growing global competition, (2) resulting slower gross domestic product and personal income growth, and (3) a consequent rise in income inequality. Without a more effective growth model to both broaden and deepen the role of technology, declining growth and its skewed distribution among income classes will perpetuate current social and political unrest. To achieve both broader and deeper technology-based growth across the economy, the proposed technology element model specifies the four major asset categories that characterize technology-based economic development, which combine to drive more effective growth policy analysis and development.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44448570","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 focuses on scientists working with CRISPR in Norway, where genetic modification is thought to be a particularly stigmatized technology with strict regulation and a strong consumer skepticism. Drawing on actor–network theory, we investigate the translation work these scientists perform to mobilize CRISPR as a more legitimate technology and how they relate to society’s perception of GMO. We find that the scientists make co-productions of CRISPR as a ‘more controllable’ and ‘socially useful’ technology and show how they attempt to mobilize industry, farmers, media, politicians, and youth by (1) distinguishing CRISPR from GMO, (2) assuring the consumers of CRISPR’s safety, and (3) creating trust through openness about the risks. We conclude that the scientists’ efforts are twofold; they work on solving societal challenges, as well as making continuous efforts to manage their relationship to society. An important part of this work was seen as providing knowledge and creating ‘new understandings’ about CRISPR; however, if research should take place in conversation with society’s views and opinions, we suggest that the scientists should enter into a two-way dialog with the consumers about these definitions.
{"title":"Making space for CRISPR: scientists’ translation work to make gene editing a legitimate technology","authors":"Marit Svingen, Lisbeth Jahren","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad050","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper focuses on scientists working with CRISPR in Norway, where genetic modification is thought to be a particularly stigmatized technology with strict regulation and a strong consumer skepticism. Drawing on actor–network theory, we investigate the translation work these scientists perform to mobilize CRISPR as a more legitimate technology and how they relate to society’s perception of GMO. We find that the scientists make co-productions of CRISPR as a ‘more controllable’ and ‘socially useful’ technology and show how they attempt to mobilize industry, farmers, media, politicians, and youth by (1) distinguishing CRISPR from GMO, (2) assuring the consumers of CRISPR’s safety, and (3) creating trust through openness about the risks. We conclude that the scientists’ efforts are twofold; they work on solving societal challenges, as well as making continuous efforts to manage their relationship to society. An important part of this work was seen as providing knowledge and creating ‘new understandings’ about CRISPR; however, if research should take place in conversation with society’s views and opinions, we suggest that the scientists should enter into a two-way dialog with the consumers about these definitions.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48312620","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}
Liv Langfeldt, Ingvild Reymert, Silje Marie Svartefoss
Abstract With the increasing reliance on competitive grants to fund research, we see a review system under pressure. While peer review has long been perceived as the cornerstone of self-governance in science, researchers have expressed distrust in the peer review procedures of funding agencies. This paper draws on literature pointing out ability, benevolence, and integrity as important for trustworthiness and explores the conditions under which researchers have confidence in grant review. Based on rich survey material, we find that researchers trust grant reviewers far less than they trust journal peer reviewers or their colleagues’ ability to assess their research. Yet, scholars who have success with grant proposals or serve on grant review panels appear to have more trust in grant reviewers. We conclude that transparency and reviewers with field competencies are crucial for trust in grant review and discuss how this can be ensured.
{"title":"Distrust in grant peer review—reasons and remedies","authors":"Liv Langfeldt, Ingvild Reymert, Silje Marie Svartefoss","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad051","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With the increasing reliance on competitive grants to fund research, we see a review system under pressure. While peer review has long been perceived as the cornerstone of self-governance in science, researchers have expressed distrust in the peer review procedures of funding agencies. This paper draws on literature pointing out ability, benevolence, and integrity as important for trustworthiness and explores the conditions under which researchers have confidence in grant review. Based on rich survey material, we find that researchers trust grant reviewers far less than they trust journal peer reviewers or their colleagues’ ability to assess their research. Yet, scholars who have success with grant proposals or serve on grant review panels appear to have more trust in grant reviewers. We conclude that transparency and reviewers with field competencies are crucial for trust in grant review and discuss how this can be ensured.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135671385","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 European universities of applied sciences (UASs), the intensity of research activities and the level of differentiation from universities vary across countries. We investigate whether the differentiation in the research function of UASs is reflected in their participation in the European Union Framework Programs for Research and Innovation (EU-FPs). We focus on the current and former UASs in four higher education systems with distinct levels of differentiation—the UK, Norway, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Our results show significant cross-country differences in the intensity and type of EU-FP projects acquired. The former UASs in the UK and Norway had a participation profile similar to that of universities. In more differentiated higher education systems, Swiss and Dutch UASs were more geared toward applied projects. Variations both across and within countries emphasize the importance of research capacities. Our results carry implications for how national and European authorities can foster UAS participation in EU-FPs.
{"title":"Universities of applied sciences’ EU research project participation through the lens of differentiation","authors":"Marco Cavallaro","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad048","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In European universities of applied sciences (UASs), the intensity of research activities and the level of differentiation from universities vary across countries. We investigate whether the differentiation in the research function of UASs is reflected in their participation in the European Union Framework Programs for Research and Innovation (EU-FPs). We focus on the current and former UASs in four higher education systems with distinct levels of differentiation—the UK, Norway, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Our results show significant cross-country differences in the intensity and type of EU-FP projects acquired. The former UASs in the UK and Norway had a participation profile similar to that of universities. In more differentiated higher education systems, Swiss and Dutch UASs were more geared toward applied projects. Variations both across and within countries emphasize the importance of research capacities. Our results carry implications for how national and European authorities can foster UAS participation in EU-FPs.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49030365","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}
Abstract The conditions of mainstream research funding constrain risky, novel research. However, alternative grants are emerging. We study grantees of a double-blinded funding scheme targeting risky, novel research: The Villum Experiment (VE). Without prompting, scientists juxtaposed the experience of performing research under these conditions with that of performing research funded by mainstream grants: fun and less fun. The conditions of VE felt less intrusive and appealed to their self-perceptions and idealized views of scientific work, which shaped how they conducted the funded research. This paper makes three contributions: (1) it reaffirms that how researchers experience grant conditions affects whether a scheme affords what it intends, (2) it highlights that the affordances of research funding are relative to other concurrent funding options, and (3) it shows that small, more broadly allocatable grants can afford scientists a protected space for autonomous research, usually associated with elusive tenure positions or European Research Council (ERC) grants.
{"title":"Fun and less fun funding: the experiential affordances of research grant conditions","authors":"Andreas Kjær Stage, Ea Høg Utoft","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad047","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The conditions of mainstream research funding constrain risky, novel research. However, alternative grants are emerging. We study grantees of a double-blinded funding scheme targeting risky, novel research: The Villum Experiment (VE). Without prompting, scientists juxtaposed the experience of performing research under these conditions with that of performing research funded by mainstream grants: fun and less fun. The conditions of VE felt less intrusive and appealed to their self-perceptions and idealized views of scientific work, which shaped how they conducted the funded research. This paper makes three contributions: (1) it reaffirms that how researchers experience grant conditions affects whether a scheme affords what it intends, (2) it highlights that the affordances of research funding are relative to other concurrent funding options, and (3) it shows that small, more broadly allocatable grants can afford scientists a protected space for autonomous research, usually associated with elusive tenure positions or European Research Council (ERC) grants.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135444619","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 homegrown strategy (i.e. supporting domestic enterprises) in the high-tech manufacturing sector is very important for developing countries’ sustainable growth and economic security. In reality, only some local governments adopt the homegrown strategy in high-tech industries while others not. This paper attempts to explore factors affecting local governments’ adoption of the homegrown strategy in the high-tech sector. It argues that under the decentralized fiscal system and relative performance–based cadre evaluation system, local development strategy choices in a high-tech industry are significantly shaped by two factors: (1) the size of the local high-tech product market in the early stage of this industry’s development and (2) the support for domestic enterprises from the central government. Localities with a large local high-tech product market and support from the center are more likely to adopt the homegrown strategy. Case studies on eight Chinese sub-provincial localities’ chipmaking industries confirm these hypotheses.
{"title":"Local market, central government support, and local governments’ homegrown development strategy in high-tech industries","authors":"Huidong Peng","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad046","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The homegrown strategy (i.e. supporting domestic enterprises) in the high-tech manufacturing sector is very important for developing countries’ sustainable growth and economic security. In reality, only some local governments adopt the homegrown strategy in high-tech industries while others not. This paper attempts to explore factors affecting local governments’ adoption of the homegrown strategy in the high-tech sector. It argues that under the decentralized fiscal system and relative performance–based cadre evaluation system, local development strategy choices in a high-tech industry are significantly shaped by two factors: (1) the size of the local high-tech product market in the early stage of this industry’s development and (2) the support for domestic enterprises from the central government. Localities with a large local high-tech product market and support from the center are more likely to adopt the homegrown strategy. Case studies on eight Chinese sub-provincial localities’ chipmaking industries confirm these hypotheses.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46537377","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}
There has been a significantly increased amount of literature on various aspects of artificial intelligence (AI), but research on AI governance has been a considerably underdeveloped area. This study proposes a comprehensive framework for designing AI governance in the public sector to overcome the limitations of previous studies that primarily dealt with the fragmentary aspect of AI. Also, we applied the developed framework to the case of Korea by combining it with the rank-order survey questions that target experts. This case study presents how to use the framework and provides insight for other countries.
{"title":"To govern or be governed: an integrated framework for AI governance in the public sector","authors":"Hyeri Choi, M. Park","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad045","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 There has been a significantly increased amount of literature on various aspects of artificial intelligence (AI), but research on AI governance has been a considerably underdeveloped area. This study proposes a comprehensive framework for designing AI governance in the public sector to overcome the limitations of previous studies that primarily dealt with the fragmentary aspect of AI. Also, we applied the developed framework to the case of Korea by combining it with the rank-order survey questions that target experts. This case study presents how to use the framework and provides insight for other countries.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45581247","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}
Chinese governments at all levels have been using various policies to encourage innovation by firms. However, few studies considered the superimposed effects of multilevel innovation policies. Based on the panel data of 443 Chinese innovation–oriented firms from 2008 to 2011, this study investigates the complementarities between national and local science and technology programmes. The heterogeneous effects across stages of the innovation process are also considered. Results show that the national science and technology (S&T) programmes significantly increase firms’ external research and development (R&D) expenditure but inhibit the commercialisation. In addition, the national and local S&T programmes complement each other in promoting external R&D expenditure while presenting substitutive in increasing patent outputs. This paper further finds that national and local programmes are more likely to be complementary at high subsidy intensity. This study contributes to the development of policy mix theory and has manifold implications for designing pertinent innovation policy systems
{"title":"Multilevel innovation policy mix in China: do local programmes complement national programmes?","authors":"Xing Shi, Yating Guo, Huiping Dong, Shuai Wang","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad044","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Chinese governments at all levels have been using various policies to encourage innovation by firms. However, few studies considered the superimposed effects of multilevel innovation policies. Based on the panel data of 443 Chinese innovation–oriented firms from 2008 to 2011, this study investigates the complementarities between national and local science and technology programmes. The heterogeneous effects across stages of the innovation process are also considered. Results show that the national science and technology (S&T) programmes significantly increase firms’ external research and development (R&D) expenditure but inhibit the commercialisation. In addition, the national and local S&T programmes complement each other in promoting external R&D expenditure while presenting substitutive in increasing patent outputs. This paper further finds that national and local programmes are more likely to be complementary at high subsidy intensity. This study contributes to the development of policy mix theory and has manifold implications for designing pertinent innovation policy systems","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47209265","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：