Transformando las prácticas de evaluación en las agencias de innovación para fomentar transiciones hacia la sostenibilidad

  1. Sandro Giachi 1
  1. 1 University of Sussex
    info

    University of Sussex

    Brighton, Reino Unido

    ROR https://ror.org/00ayhx656

Revue:
Arxius de Ciències Socials

ISSN: 2990-2258

Année de publication: 2019

Titre de la publication: PERSPECTIVAS EMERGENTES EN SOCIOLOGÍA: EL ESPACIO DE LOS PUNTOS DE VISTA

Número: 40

Pages: 21-30

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openRODERIC editor

D'autres publications dans: Arxius de Ciències Socials

Objectifs de Développement Durable

Résumé

The aim of the study is to identify different styles and practices for evaluation of innovation policies based on different orientations, focusing on the case of the paradigm of transformative change to foster transitions towards sustainability, and the problems associated with its application. The study is exploratory, and it uses public funding agencies for innovation as strategic research settings. Based on the information provided by the experience of an international consortium participated by funding agencies from different countries, the main concepts and problems presented in the theoretical debate are illustrated. Finally, the main contributions of the study to the theory and practice of evaluating innovation policies are discussed from a sociological perspective.

Références bibliographiques

  • AROCENA, R., GÖRANSSON, B. y SUTZ, J. (2018), Developmental Universities in Inclusive Innovation Systems Alternatives for Knowledge Democratization in the Global South. Cham, Palgrave Macmillan.
  • BLEDA, M., DEL RIO, P. (2013): “The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems”, Research policy, 42(5), 1039-1052.
  • BONI, A., BELDA-MIQUEL, S. y PELLICER-SIFRES, V. (2018): “Innovación transformadora. Propuestas desde la innovación social colectiva para el desarrollo humano”, RECERCA-Revista de pensament & analisi, 23, 67-94.
  • BONI, A, GIACHI, S. y MOLAS-GALLART, J. (2019), Towards a framework for Transformative Innovation Policy Evaluation. TIPC Final Report. En imprenta.
  • BUSH, V. (1945), Science: the endless frontier. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
  • CALLON, M., LASCOUMES, P. y BARTHE, Y. (2001), Acting in an uncertain world: An essay on technical democracy. Cambridge: MIT press.
  • CANTWELL, J. (2005): “Innovation and Competitiveness”, en J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery y R.R. Nelson (comp), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; pp.543-567.
  • CHATAWAY, J., DANIELS, C., KANGER, L., SCHOT, J. y STEINMUELLER, E. (2017): “Developing and Enacting Transformative Innovation Policy”. Presentado en 8th International Sustainability Transitions Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 18 – 21 de junio (en línea)
  • D’ESTE, P., RAMOS-VIELBA, I., WOOLLEY, R. y AMARA, N. (2018): “How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework”, Science and Public Policy, 45(6): 752-763.
  • EDLER, J. y FAGERBERG, J. (2017): “Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1): 2-23.
  • FREEMAN, C., (1988): “Japan: a new national system of innovation”, en G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R.R. Nelson, G. Silverberg y L. Soete (comp), Technical Change and Economic Theory. Londres: Pinter Publishers; pp. 330–348.
  • GEELS, F. W. (2002): “Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study”, Research policy, 31(8-9), 1257-1274.
  • GEELS, F. W. (2004): “From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory”, Research Policy, 33(6–7): 897–920.
  • GEELS, F. W., y SCHOT, J. (2007): “Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways”, Research Policy, 36(3): 399–417.
  • GIACHI, S. y GARCIA-LARA, V. (2018), “Opening spaces for sustainability transitions from public institutions: the case of the Mayan Octopus industry (Yucatan)”
  • GODIN, B. (2015), Innovation contested: The idea of innovation over the centuries. Nueva York, Routledge.
  • GRIN, J., ROTMANS, J. y SCHOT, J. (2010), Transitions to sustainable development: new directions in the study of long term transformative change. Nueva York, Routledge.
  • HEISKANEN E. y MATSCHOSS K. (2018): “Evaluating Climate Governance Experiments. Participants’ Perspectives on Low-Carbon Experiments in Finland”, en B. Turnheim, P. Kivimaa y F. Berkhout (comp), Innovating climate governance: Moving beyond experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; pp.182-200.
  • KEMP, R., SCHOT, J. y HOOGMA, R. (1998): “Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management”, Technology analysis & strategic management, 10(2), 175-198.
  • LUEDERITZ, C., et al. (2017): “Learning through evaluation – A tentative evaluative scheme for sustainability transition experiments”, Journal of Cleaner Production 169: 61-76.
  • LUNDVALL, B.-A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Londres: Pinter.
  • MAGRO, E. y WILSON, J. R. (2013): “Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix”, Research policy, 42(9), 1647-1656.
  • MARTIN, S., SCOTT, J. T. (2000): “The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation”, Research policy, 29(4-5), 437-447.
  • MOLAS-GALLART, J. y DAVIES, A. (2006): “Toward theory-led evaluation: The experience of European science, technology, and innovation policies”. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 64-82.
  • OWEN, R., MACNAGHTEN, P. y STILGOE, J. (2012): “Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society”, Science and public policy, 39(6): 751-760.
  • RÀFOLS, I. (2018): “S&T indicators in the wild: Contextualization and participation for responsible metrics”, Research Evaluation, 28(1), 7-22.
  • SALTER, A.J., y MARTIN, B. R. (2001): “The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review”, Research policy, 30(3), 509-532.
  • SCHOT, J. y STEINMUELLER, W. E. (2018): “Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change”, Research Policy, 47(9): 1554-1567.
  • SMITH, A., STIRLING, A. y BERKHOUT, F. (2005): “The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions”. Research policy, 34(10): 1491-1510.
  • TAANMAN, M. (2014), Looking for Transitions. Monitoring approach for sustainable transition programmes. Tesis doctoral. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit.
  • TURNHEIM, B., KIVIMAA, P. y BERKHOUT, F. (2018): “Experiments and beyond: An emerging agenda for climate governance innovation”, en B. Turnheim, P. Kivimaa y F. Berkhout (comp), Innovating climate governance: Moving beyond experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; pp. 216-241.
  • WEBER, K. M. y ROHRACHER, H. (2012): “Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework”, Research Policy, 41(6): 1037-1047.
  • WEISS, C. H. (1997): “How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway?”, Evaluation Review, 21(4): 501-524
La source de données: Dialnet