The role of knowledge users in public-private research programs: An evaluation challenge

Research Evaluation

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 103-116

  Hessels, Laurens K ^a   Wardenaar, Tjerk ^a   Boon, Wouter P C ^b   Ploeg, Matthias ^c  

^a Rathenau Institute KNAW   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c Technopolis Group Austria   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Consortium; knowledge user; network; ppp; program evaluation; public private research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898895244     PISSN: 09582029     EISSN: 14715449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/reseval/rvu007     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Arrow, K. J. (1962) 'The economic implications of learning by doing ', Review of Economic Studies, 29: 155-73.
2. Bennett, C. J. and Howlett, M. (1992) 'The lessons of learning: R econciling theories of policy learning and policy change' , Policy Sciences, 25: 275-94.
3. Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M. (2011) 'The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and ge ography' , Research Policy, 40: 81-93.
4. Boon, W. P. C. et al. (2011) ' Demand articulation in emerging technologies: Intermediary user organisations as co-producers' , Research Policy, 40: 242-52.
5. Borras, S. (2011) ' Policy learning and organizational capacities in innovation policies' , Science and Public Policy, 38: 725-34.
6. Bozeman, B. and Sarewitz, D. (2005) 'Public values and public failure in US science policy ' , Science and Public Policy, 32: 119-36.
7. Bozeman B. Sarewitz D. (2011) 'Public value mapping and science policy evaluation ', Minerva, 49: 1-23.
8. Braun, D. (2003) 'Lasting tensions in research policy-making-A delegation problem ' , Science and Public Policy, 30: 309-21.
9. Caron-Flinterman, J. F., Broerse, J. F. and Bunders, J. F. G.(2005) 'The experiental knowledge of patients: A new resource for biomedical research ' , Social Science and Medicine, 60: 2575-84.
10. Commissie Van Wijzen Kennis en Innovatie. (2011) Advies Van De Commissie over De resultaten Van De totale BSIK-impuls. Den Haag: Bijlage bij Kamerstuk 32637, nr. 31.
11. Cummings, J. N. and Kiesler, S. (2007) 'Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations ', Research Policy, 36: 1620-34.
12. Davenport, S., Leitch, S. and Rip, A. (2003) 'The 'user ' in research funding negotiation processes', Science and Public Policy, 30: 239-50.
13. De Jong S. P.L. et al. (2011)' Evaluation of research in context: An approach and two cases Research Evaluation 20 61-72.
14. De Wit, J., Dankbaar, B. and Vissers, G. (2007) 'Open Innovation: The new way of knowledge transfer ', Journal of Business Chemistry, 4: 11-9.
15. Elberse, J. E. et al. (2012) ' Patient involvement in a scientific advisory process: Setting the research agenda for medical products' , Health Policy, 107: 231-42.
16. European Commission. (2011) Horizon 2020-The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation-Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions, Brussels: COM(2011) 808 final.
17. Fisher, D., Atkinson-Grosjean, J. and House, D. (2001) ' Changes in academy/industry/state relations in Canada: The creation and development of the Networks of Excellence' , Minerva, 39: 299-325.
18. Gibbons, M. et al. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE.
19. Gray, D. O. (2011) 'Cro ss-sector research collaboration in the USA: A national innovation systems perspective' , Science and Public Policy, 38: 123-33.
20. Hegger, D. et al. (2012) ' Conceptualising joint knowledge production in regional climate change adaptation projects: Success conditions and levers for action ', Environmental Science & Policy, 18: 52-65.
21. Hemlin, S. and Rasmussen, S. B. (2006) 'The shift in academic quality control ', Science Technology and Human Values, 31: 173-98.
22. Hessels, L. K. (2013) ' Coordination in the science system: Theoretical framework and a case study of an intermediary organisation' , Minerva, 51: 317-39.
23. Hessels, L. K. and Van Lente, H. (2008) 'Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda ', Research Policy, 37: 740-60.
24. Hessels, L. K. and Deuten, J. J. (2013) Coördinatie Van publiekprivaat onderzoek: Van variëteit naar maatwerk. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut, SciSA report 1328.
25. Hessels, L. K. et al. (2011) 'Changing struggles for relevance in eight fields of natural science' , Industry and Higher Education, 25: 347-57.
26. Jacob, M. (2005) 'Boundary work in contemporary science policy: A review ', Prometheus, 23: 195-207.
27. Johnson, N. L., Lilja, N. and Ashby, J. A. (2003) ' Measuring the impact of user participation in agricultural and natural resource management research' , Agricultural Systems, 78: 287-306.
28. Joribert, C. and Wesselink, A. (2012) ' Research impacts and impact on research in biodiversity conservation: The influence of stakeholder engagement' , Environmental Science & Policy, 22: 100-11.
29. Klenk, N. L., Hickey, G. M. and MacLellan, J. I. (2010) ' Evaluating the social capital accrued in large research networks: The case of the Sustainable Forest Management Network (1995-2009)' , Social Studies of Science, 40: 931-60.
30. Klerkx, L. and Leeuwis, C. (2008 a) ' Institutionalizing end-user demand steering in agricultural R&D: Farmer levy funding of R&D in The Netherlands' , Research Policy, 37: 460-72.
31. Klerkx L. Leeuwis, C. (2008 b) 'Delegation of authority in research funding to networks: Experience with a multiple goal boundary organization' , Science and Public Policy, 35: 183-96.
32. Kloet, R. R. et al. (2013) ' Understanding Constraints in the Dynamics of a Research Program Intended as a Niche Innovation' , Science and Public Policy, 40: 206-18.
33. Lepori, B et al. (2007) ' Indicators for comparative analysis of public project funding: Concepts, implementation and evaluation' , Research Evaluation, 16: 243-55.
34. McNie, E. C. (2012) ' Delivering climate services: Organizational strategies and approaches for producing useful climate-science information' , Weather, Climate, and Society, 5: 14-26.
35. Merkx F. Van Den Besselaar, P. 2008 Positioning indicators for cross-disciplinary challenges: The Dutch coastal defense research case Research Evaluation 17 4-16.
36. Neef, A. and Neubert, D. (2011) ' Stakeholders participation in agricultural research projects: A conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making' , Agriculture and Human Values, 28: 179-94.
37. Reich, M. R. (2000) 'Public-private partnerships for public health ', Nature medicine, 6: 617-20.
38. Roelofsen, A. et al. (2011) ' Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what' , Research Policy, 40: 341-54.
39. Rogers, J. (2012) ' Introducing the issue theme: Rising to the challenges of R&D impact assessment' , Research Evaluation, 21: 329-31.
40. Salles-Filho, S. et al. (2011) ' Evaluation of ST&I programs: A methodological approach to the Brazilian Small Business Program and some comparisons with the SBIR program' , Research Evaluation, 20: 159-71.
41. Spaapen, J. and Van Drooge, L. (2011) 'Introducing 'productive interactions ' in social impact assessment', Research Evaluation, 20: 211-8.
42. Spielman, D. and von Grebmer, K. (2006) 'Public-private partnerships in international agricultural research: An analysis of constraints' , Journal of Technology Transfer, 31: 291-300.
43. Stewart, J. (1995) 'Models of priority-setting for public sector research ', Resea rch Policy, 24: 115-26.
44. Stiglitz, J. E. (1986) Economics of the Public Sector. New York: W.W. Norton.
45. Stokes, D. E. (1997) Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
46. Turpin, T., Garrett-Jones, S. and Woolley, R. (2011) ' Crosssector research collaboration in Australia: The Cooperative Research Centres Program at the crossroads' , Science and Public Policy, 38: 87-98.
47. Van Der Veen, G. et al. (2005) Evaluation Leading Technological Institutes: Final Report. Amsterdam: Technopolis Group.
48. Van Gils, M., Vissers, G. and De Wit, J. (2009) ' Selecting the right channel for knowledge transfer between industry and science: Consider the R&D-activity' , European Journal of Innovation Management, 12: 492-511.
49. Von Hippel, E. (2005) Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
50. Wardenaar, T. (2013) ' Kenniscoproductie in klimaatprogramma's: Balanceren tussen wetenschappelijk project en consultancyopdracht' . In: Boon, W. and Horlings, E. (eds) Kenniscoproductie voor De grote maatschappelijke vraagstukken, pp. 24-35. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.
51. Wardenaar, T., De Jong, S. P.L and Hessels, L. K. (2014) ' Varieties of research coordination: A comparative analysis of two strategic research consortia' , Science and Public Policy, doi:10.1093/scipol/scu008.