Explaining the science and technology policies of regional governments

Regional Studies

Volumn 39, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 939-954

  Sanz Menéndez, Luis ^a   Cruz Castro, Laura ^a  

^a CSIC   (Spain)

Author keywords

Interests and institutions; Policy diffusion; Political preferences; Regional research and development policies; Spanish regions

Indexed keywords

GOVERNANCE APPROACH; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

EID: 27844589978     PISSN: 00343404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00343400500289945     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Adshead M. and Quinn B. (1998) The move from government to governance: Irish development policy's paradigm shift, Policy and Politics 26, 209-225.
2. Baumgartner F. R. and Jones B. D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
3. Benz A. and Eberlein B. (1999) The Europeanization of regional policies: patterns of multi-level governance, Journal of European Public Policy 6, 329-348.
4. Boix C. (1998) Political Parties, Growth and Equality: Conservative and Social Democratic Economic Strategies in the World Economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
5. Braun D. (1993) Who governs intermediary agencies? Principal-agent relations in research policy-making, Journal of Public Policy 13, 135-162.
6. Brooks C. (1999) Values and views of government? Analysing the ideological sources of public policy preferences, Social Science Research 28, 137-161.
7. Bulmer S. and Padgett S. (2005) Policy transfer in the European Union: an institutionalist perspective, British Journal of Political Science 35, 103-126.
8. Cooke P (2004a) The role of research in regional innovation systems: new models meeting knowledge economy demands, International Journal of Technology Management 28, 507-533.
9. Cooke P. (2004b) Life sciences clusters and regional science policy, Urban Studies 41, 1113-1131.
10. Cooke P., Boekholt P. and Todling F. (2001) The Governance of Innovation in Europe: Regional Perspectives on Global Competitiveness. Continuum International, London.
11. Cooke, P., Gómez-Uranga M. and Etxebarría G. (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimensions, Research Policy 26, 475-491.
12. Cozzens S. E. and Melkers J. E. (1997) Use and usefulness of performance measurement in state science and technology programs, Policy Studies Journal 25, 425-435.
13. Cozzens S. E. and Woodhouse E. J. (1995) Science, government, and the politics of knowledge, in Jasanoff S., Markle G. E., Petersen J. C. and Pinch T. (Eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, pp. 533-553. Sage, London.
14. Cruz-Castro L. and Sanz-Menéndez L. (2005) Politics and institutions: European parliamentary technology assessment, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 72, 429-448.
15. Cruz-Castro L., Fernández M. and Sanz-Menéndez L. (2003) La importancia de los intereses académicos en la política científica y tecnológica catalana, Papers. Revista de Sociología 70, 75-105.
16. Dickson D. (1984/88) The New Politics of Science, 2nd Edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
17. Dohse D. (2000) Technology policy and the regions - the case of the Bioregio contest, Research Policy 29, 1111-1133.
18. Dolowitz D. P. and Marsh D. (2000) Learning from abroad: the role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration 13, 5-24.
19. Druckman J. N. and Lupia A. (2000) Preference formation, Annual Review of Political Science 3, 1-24.
20. European Commission (1993) White Paper on 'Growth, Competitiveness and Employment and Ways Forward into the 21st Century'. COM (93) 700 (final). EC, Brussels.
21. European Commission (1995) Green Paper on Innovation. COM (95) 688 (final). EC, Brussels.
22. Edler J., Kuhlmann S. and Behrens M. (Eds) (2003) Changing Governance of Research and Technology Policy. The European Research Area. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
23. Ewers H.-J. and Wettmann R. W. (1980) Innovation oriented regional policy, Regional Studies 14, 161-179.
24. Feller I. (1992) American state governments as models for national science policy, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 11, 288-309.
25. Fernández M., Sanz-Menéndez L. and Cruz-Castro L. (2003) Diseño institucional y preferencias políticas: o cómo equilibrar los intereses académicos en la política de ciencia, tecnología e innovación gallega, Inguarak, Revista Vasca de Sociología y Ciencia Política 35, 33-68.
26. Grande E. (1996) The state and interest groups in a framework of multi-level decision-making: the case of the European Union, Journal of European Public Policy 3, 318-338.
27. Guston D. (1999) Between Politics and Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
28. Haas P. M (1992) Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination, International Organization 46, 1-35.
29. Hall P. A. (1986) Governing the Economy. The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France. Polity, Cambridge.
30. Hall P. A. (1989) Conclusion; the politics of Keynesian ideas, in Hall P. A. (Ed.) The Political Power of Economic Ideas. Keynesianism Across Nations, pp. 361-391. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
31. Hall P. A. (1993) Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state, Comparative Politics 25, 275-296.
32. Hassink R. (1993) Regional innovation policies compared, Urban Studies 30, 1009-1024.
33. Heclo H. (1974) Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
34. Hibbs D. A. (1977) Political parties and macroeconomic policy, American Political Science Review 71, 1467-1487.
35. Hooghe L. and Marks G. (2001) Multi-level Governance and European Integration. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.
36. Kaiser R. (2003) The multi-level science policy and regional innovation: the case of them Munich cluster for pharmaceutical biotechnology, European Planning Studies 11, 841-857.
37. Kaiser, R. and Prange H. (2004a) The reconfiguration of national innovation systems - the example of German biotechnology, Research Policy 33, 395-408.
38. Kaiser R. and Prange H. (2004b) Managing diversity in a system of multi-level governance: the open method of coordination in innovation policy, Journal of European Public Policy 11, 249-266.
39. Keating M. (2002) Devolution and public policy in the United Kingdom. Divergence or convergence?, in: Adams J. and Robinson P. (Eds) Devolution in Practice: Public Policy Differences within the UK. Institute for Public Policy, London.
40. Kingdon J. W. (1984/95) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, 2nd Edn. HarperCollins, London.
41. Koschatzky K. (2000) The Regionalisation of the Innovation Policy in Germany - Theoretical Foundations and Recent Experience. Working Paper 1/ 2000. Fraunhofer Institut System -und Innovationsforschungs (FhG-ISI).
42. Kuitunen S. (2002) What is the role of the EU Structural Funds in promoting RTDI? Review of some empirical findings, Research Evaluation 11, 49-58.
43. Lambright H. and Teich A. (1989) Science, technology and state economic development, Policy Studies Journal 18, 135-147.
44. Landabaso M. (1995) Promoción de la innovación en la política regional comunitaria. Dissertation, Universidad del País Vasco, Bilbao.
45. Larédo P. (2003) Six major challenges facing public intervention in higher education, science, technology and innovation, Science and Public Policy 30, 4-12.
46. Lasswell H. (1936) Politics: who gets what, when and how, in Lasswell H. (Ed.) The Political Writings of Harold D. Lasswell, pp. 295-461. Free Press, Glencoe, 1951.
47. Long W. and Féller I. (1972) State support of R&D: an uncertain path to economic growth, Land Economics 48, 220-227.
48. Loughlin J. (1996) 'Europe of the regions' and the federalisation of Europe, Publius - The Journal of Federalism 26, 141-162.
49. Lowi T. J. (1972) Four systems of policy, politics and choice, Public Administration 32, 298-310.
50. Lyall C. and Tait J. (2004) Foresight in a multi-level governance structure: policy integration and communication, Science and Public Policy 31, 27-37.
51. Majone G. (1991) Cross-national sources of regulatory policymaking in Europe and the United States, Journal of Public Policy 11, 79-106.
52. March J. G. and Olsen J. P. (1984) The new institutionalism: organizational factors in political life, American Political Science Review 78, 734-749.
53. Marks G. (1992) Structural policy and 1992, in Sbragia A. (Ed.) Euro-Politics. Institutions and Policy Making in the 'New? European Community. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.
54. Marks G., Hooghe L. and Blank K. (1996) European Integration from the 1980s: state-centric v. multi-level governance, Journal of Common Market Studies 34, 343-378.
55. Martin S. (1998) EU programmes and the evolution of the local economic governance in the UK, European Urban and Regional Studies 5, 237-248.
56. Metcalfe S. E. and Georghiou L. (1998) Equilibrium and evolutionary foundations of technology policy, STI Science, Technology and Industry Review 22, 75-100.
57. Moe T. M. (1980) The Organization of Interests. Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
58. Moreno L. (2002) Decentralization in Spain, Regional Studies 36, 399-408.
59. Moso M. (2000) Origen y evolución de las políticas científicas y tecnológicas en la Comunidad Autónoma de País Vasco (1980-1998). Dissertation, Basque Country University Press, Bilbao.
60. Moso M. and Olazarán M. (2002) Regional Technology Policy and the emergence of an R&D System in the Basque Country, Journal of Technology Transfer 27, 61-75.
61. Mytelka L. K. and Smith K. (2002) Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process, Research Policy 31, 1467-1479.
62. OECD (2004) Science and Innovation Policy. Key Challenges and Opportunities. OECD, Paris.
63. Pavitt K. (1991) What makes basic research economically useful, Research Policy 20, 109-119.
64. Pavitt K. (2000) Why European Union funding of academic research should be increased: a radical proposal, Science and Public Policy 27, 455-460.
65. Richardson J. J. and Jordan A. G. (1979) Governing Under Pressure. The Policy Process in a Post-Parliamentary Democracy. Martin Robertson, Oxford.
66. Romero M., Cruz-Castro L. and Sanz-Menéndez L. (2003) Estabilidad y cambio en las políticas andaluzas de ciencia, tecnología e innovación, Revista Internacional de Sociología 35, 7-52.
67. Sabatier P. A. (1988) An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein, Policy Sciences 21, 129-168.
68. Sabatier P. A. (1998) The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe, Journal of European Public Policy 5, 98-130.
69. Salter A. J. and Martin B. (2001) The economic benefits of publicly funding basic research: a critical review, Research Policy 30, 509-532.
70. Sanz-Menéndez L. (1995) Policy choices, institutional constraints and policy learning: the Spanish science and technology policy in the eighties, International Journal of Technology Management 10, 255-274.
71. Sanz-Menéndez L. (1997) Estado, ciencia y tecnología en España: 1939-1997. Alianza Universidad, Madrid.
72. Sanz-Menéndez L., Cruz-Castro L. and Romero M. (2001) Recursos, intereses y difusión de modelos para la política regional de I+D: la Comunidad de Madrid, in Olazarán M. and Gómez-Uranga M. (Eds) Sistemas regionales de Innovación, pp. 375-403. Basque Country University Press, Bilbao.
73. Sanz-Menéndez, L., Muñoz E. and Garcia C. E. (1993) The vicissitudes of Spanish science and technology policy, Science and Public Policy 20, 370-380.
74. Scherzinger A. (1998) Die Technologiepolitik der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland -ein Überblick. Discussion Paper No. 164. DIW, Berlin.
75. Schön D. A. and Rein M. (1994) Frame Reflection. Towards the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. Basic, New York.
76. Skocpol T. and Finegold K. (1982) State capacity and economic intervention in the early New Deal, Political Science Quarterly 97, 255-278.
77. Smith A. (1997) Studying multi-level governance. Examples from French translations of the structural funds, Public Administration 73, 711-729.
78. Soete L. and Arundel, A. (Eds) (1993) An Integrated Approach to European Innovation and Technology Diffusion Policy, A Maastricht Memorandum. CE, Brussels.
79. Steinmo S., Thelen K. and Longstreth F. (Eds) (1992) Structuring Politics. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
80. Sturn D. (2000) Decentralized industrial policies in practice: the case of Austria and Styria, European Planning Studies 8, 169-182.
81. Walker J. L., Jr (1991) Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
82. Weir M. (1992) Ideas and the politics of bounded innovation, in Steinmo S., Thelen K. and Longstreth F. (Eds) Structuring Politics. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, pp. 188-216. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
83. Wilson D. and Souitaris V. (2002) Do Germany's federal and land governments (still) co-ordinate their innovation policies?, Research Policy 31, 1123-1140.