将包容作为高收入国家的科技创新政策目标:脱钩困境

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Science and Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1093/scipol/scae019
Helka Kalliomäki, Johanna Kalliokoski, Thomas Woodson, Leena Kunttu, Jari Kuusisto
{"title":"将包容作为高收入国家的科技创新政策目标:脱钩困境","authors":"Helka Kalliomäki, Johanna Kalliokoski, Thomas Woodson, Leena Kunttu, Jari Kuusisto","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scae019","DOIUrl":null,"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":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"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\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae019\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

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。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Inclusion as a science, technology, and innovation policy objective in high-income countries: the decoupling dilemma
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Diversity and directionality: friends or foes in sustainability transitions? Morality policy at the frontier of science: legislators’ views on germline engineering Regulatory agencies as innovation enablers: a conceptualization The impact of winning funding on researcher productivity, results from a randomized trial Operation warp speed: Harbinger of American industrial innovation policies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1