And it is enhanced by coherent actions of a range of key decisionmakker in research policy, economy and society.
, Research policy, vol. 31 (7), 2002, pp. 1141 1161.27 K. Koch, M. Rafiquzzaman, S. Rao, The Impact of Regulatory policies on Innovation:
Danish Institute for Studies in Research and Research policy. Statens Teknisk-Videnskabelige Forskningsråd. 2002. Strategiplan 2003 2007.
transparent and open participatory governance processes Ultimate Influence on (research policy) agendas of actors, both public and private (as revealed, for instance,
Research policy 20, no. 5: 499 514. Freeman, C. 2002. Continental, national, and sub-national innovation systems complementarity and economic growth.
Research policy 31, no. 2: 191 211. Havas, A d. Schartinger, and M. Weber. 2007. Experiences and practices of technology foresight in the European region.
Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, Norway and writing her Phd on values and uncertainty in foresight informing research policy priorities.
the role of foresight in the selection of research policy priorities, 13 14 may 2002, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain.
This strategic steering of research is performed also through other transnational (non EU) policy frameworks of research policy integration, namely the intergovernmental institutions, such as CERN and ESA.
In other words, Foresights for research policy purposes, can be characterised by their positioning in the governance arenas vs.
In consequence, one can observe the evolution of different configurations entailing different forms and directions of organisation, inter-organisational research collaboration, use of research policy instruments,
)( 1997) 83 118.12 F. W. Geels, J. Schot, Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways, Research policy 36 (3)( 2007) 399 417.13 F. W
, Research policy 6 (1)( 1977) 36 76.15 A. Rip, R. Kemp, Technological change, in: S. Rayner, E. L. Malone (Eds.
the case of the European union, Journal of European Public policy 3 (3)( 1996) 318 338.22 S. Kuhlmann, Future governance of innovation policy in Europe three scenarios, Research policy 30
This trend has begun to be mirrored in research policy-making where to a certain extent we()TD$FIG 10.6%5. 5%9. 5%9. 5%11.5%14.0%17.0%22.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0
effects of implementing the science policy priority for biotechnology in The netherlands, Research policy 15 (1986) 253 268.16 R. Coombs, L. Georghiou, A new industrial ecology, Science 296 (2002
methodologies and selected applications, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (2008) 496 516.38 J. Edler, L. Georghiou, Public procurement and innovation resurrecting the demand side, Research policy
and the analysis of innovation and research policy with a particular focus on the civil security sector.
a literature review and a research agenda'',Research policy, Vol. 37, pp. 740-60. Justen, A.,Schippl, J.,Ho lt, A. and Fleischer, T. 2010),‘Expect the unexpected:
References 1 D. Collingridge, The Social control of Technology, Pinter, London, 1980.2 R. R. Nelson, S g. Winter, In search of useful theory of innovation, Research policy 6 (1
and research policy cases within the European commission (EC), identified‘‘a potential gap between the contributions of researchers
by research policy or its think tanks and consultants are rather broad and unspecific, and they leave lots of room for interpretation.
Research policy 11, no. 3: 147 62. Engel, P. G. H. 1997. The social organization of innovation:
Research policy 5, no. 3: 212 39. Von Hippel, E. 1988. The sources of innovation. Newyork:
Research policy 18, no. 5: 273 88. Bakker, S.,H. van Lente, and M. Meeus. 2011.
Research policy 30, no. 5: 819 36. Eames, M.,W. Mcdowall, M. Hodson, and S. Marvin. 2006.
Research policy 33, nos. 6 7: 897 920. Halonen, M.,K. Kallio, and E. Saari. 2010.
Capturing and exploring multiple potential innovation pathways show considerable promise as a way of informing technology management and research policy.
A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information science & Technology 61, no. 9: 1871 87.
Strategic dialogues for research policy making in Germany Frauke Lohr, Sebastian Hallensleben and Amina Beyer-Kutzner Abstract Purpose The mere generation of foresight results is not sufficient in itself to influence research policy.
Research policy makers need specific information and insight on how the structured view of the future provided by foresight affects their strategic planning.
Therefore, deriving the maximum benefit from foresight activities requires a carefully designed and actively driven transfer process of foresight results into research policy making.
and investigate the relevance of their theoretical foundations to transferring foresight results into research policy making.
Findings Strategic dialogues have proved to be an effective and efficient instrument for achieving the transfer of results from strategic processes such as foresight into research policy making.
Originality/value The transfer of foresight results into research policy making has featured not prominently so far in discussions of foresight efforts and methods.
Keywords Foresight, Strategic dialogue, Research policy, Stakeholder alignment, Scenario planning, Germany, Innovation, Strategic planning, Governance, Management Paper type Case study 1. The challenge of transferring foresight results Through research policy,
The success of research policy is dependent on the alignment of a broad range of relevant stakeholders from academia, industry, politics, and society.
Research policy cannot limit itself to the continued support of established activities and trend lines. Rather, it needs to anticipate future opportunities as well as future societal needs.
It is therefore essential to underpin research policy with robust assumptions and a structured view of possible future developments.
Research policy makers do not just require the structured view of the future that foresight activities provide
The key challenge is that research policy makers are not a homogeneous group, even within a single institution,
The relevance of a set of foresight results therefore needs to be explored individually for each research policy making unit.
Furthermore, the existing organizational structure in a research policy making institution (such as a government department) reflects earlier priorities
when research policy making only focuses on defining new research topics. In this paper we demonstrate how existing approaches for transferring foresight results into strategic planning can be applied to research policy making.
We present a seven-step process that is suitable as a generic framework for defining the most appropriate approach to a given situation to support research policy making.
Finally we illustrate the process with three examples from Germany and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research related to transferring results from foresight
and similar strategy processes into research policy making and research infrastructure creation. 2. Lessons from earlier work The challenge of transferring foresight results into strategic planning is well known in a business context.
Specifically with respect to research policy development in Germany, Meister and Oldenburg (2008) argues that both foresight and subsequent transfer activities have to be constructed as dialogue processes involving all relevant stakeholders.
With his summary of the key results of foresight activities in Germany in the early part of the last decade, he also illustrates once more their wide-ranging and interdisciplinary nature and hence the need for an active and carefully designed transfer to research policy making.
Dialogues used for transferring foresight results into research policy development do not fit any of these categories
The overall aim lies in making foresight results as usable and useful as possible in the work of research policy makers and in turning the transfer into an integral part of policy development.
but in this paper we restrict ourselves to their discussion in the context of research policy making.
Table I their relevance to strategic dialogues for transferring the results of foresight activities and similar strategy processes into research policy development. 3. The situation in Germany To support research policy development the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
both during the process of creating consensus views of future developments and during their translation into research policy and the creation of research infrastructure.
strategic dialogues have been employed on multiple levels in the process of research policy development: Firstly, strategic dialogues have helped to overcome the necessarily limited perspective of individual units within an organization such as a federal ministry by connecting units with each other in a loose network where ideas can VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 21
In particular, research policy makers operate in the context of political priorities and guidelines that are set at higher levels of the government institutions they work in.
or through unrelated shifts (e g. change of government after an election) then belief networks of research policy makers can be affected.
and their action in anticipation of potential research policy changes triggered by the dialogue (such as new funding programs) This can be a problem
though, if research policy initiatives do result from the strategic dialogue, stakeholders in industry and academia might be aware and receptive of them
and requirements of stakeholders and research areas there are recurring patterns in the context of research policy making that can be structured in a seven-step framework shown in Figure 1 and described in the following sections. 4. 1 Step 1:
foresight is more radical than day-to-day activities of Figure 1 VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 23 research policy makers,
for defining research policy. Therefore, step 7 brings together a small group of experts to develop one
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 25 For the BMBF, a wealth of structured information has been generated that allows formulating a future vision and recommendations for research policy initiatives,
and translation of a joint view of the future into prerequisites and recommendations for a coherent research policy and its implementation through programs and/or dedicated institutional structures. 5. Illustration with recent examples As outlined above,
For the focus area‘‘Produzierenkonsumieren 2. 0''(Production Consumption 2. 0), the strategic dialogue involved seven organizational units within the BMBF drawn from the full range of BMBF departments concerned with research policy.
B a careful selection and engagement of stakeholders considering their potential contribution, their role in developing research policy,
and B compatibility with existing strategic planning activities in individual units within the BMBF. 6. Conclusions Strategic dialogues have proved to be an effective and efficient instrument for achieving the transfer of results from strategic processes such as Foresight into research policy making.
From the perspective of research policy makers, strategic dialogues provide the missing link to transfer the results of foresight and similar strategy processes into research policy making.
and can facilitate the interplay of actors in research as well as research policy. Through our work we have come to the conclusion that a carefully designed transfer of foresight results into research policy making would be beneficial in a wide range of situations, not just in Germany but also within the EU and internationally.
References Bohm D. 1996), On Dialogue, Routledge, New york, NY. Cagnin, C. and Loveridge, D. 2011),‘A business framework for building anticipatory capacity to manage disruptive and transformative change and lead business networks towards sustainable development,
combining insights from innovation systems and multilevel perspective in a comprehensive‘failures'framework, Research policy 41 (2012) 1037 1042.
the research policy landscape evolves less by displacement of the old by the new and more by a process of geological accretion where the structures and policy styles of earlier decades continue, perhaps with some diminution,
The lists given above for EU and US research policies consist entirely of well-recognised challenges in
the Danish research Council for Research policy recommended that the Ministry for Science consider utilising futures studies in affiliation with its strategy processes 28.
The research policy strategies that were agreed upon can be enforced as more legitimate and plausible. In this sense, the networking
as contribution towards the establishment of common research policy (i e. the so-called European research area (ERA). 3 This contribution refers to a very specific project
in the scientific instrument innovation process, Research policy 5 (1976) 212 239.26 F. Piller, C. Ihl, Open innovation with Customers.
Implications for Research policy. Working Document EUR 21471. Brussels: European commission. Mateos-García, J, A Geuna, A w E Steinmueller et al. 2008.
Research policy, 29 (4/5), 627 655. Busom, I 2000. An evaluation of the effects of R&d subsidies.
Research policy, 29 (4/5), 497 529. Donzé, L 2002. Matched-pair analysis based on business survey data to evaluate the policy of supporting the adoption of advannce manufacturing technologies by Swiss firms, KOF Working Paper No. 65, July 2002.
Research policy, 29 (4/5), 657 678. Görg, H and E Strobl 2007. The effect of R&d subsidies on privaat R&d.
Research policy, 29 (4/5), 449 469. Heckman, J, H Ichimura, J Smith, J. and P Todd 1998.
Research policy, 29 (4/5), 471 495. Lach, S 2002. Do R&d subsidies stimulate or displace private R&d?
Public research funding and research policy: a long-term analysis for The swiss case. Science and Public Policcy 33 (3), 205 216.
and priorities set in Chinese research policy. This paper analyzes priority-setting in China's recent research policy.
We find that China's research policy is driven by a variety of different, and sometimes conflicting, objectives, leading to a multitude of often overlapping initiatives.
In this sense, the outline of a Chinese research policy model is therefore indicative of a more general policy change in China.
)) Priority-setting in Chinese research policies and programs operates on different levels. The first level concerns ideology and overarching national strategy.
In addition to the plans, research policy is structured and implemented by national S&t programs. China has launched various national S&t programs (jihua.
Although the drafting of the medium-and long-term plan included structures for stakeholder involvement and transparency, overall, priority-setting in China's research policy tends to be characterized by a top-down selection of both thematic areas and fundamental development strategies.
Cantner, U. and Pyke, A. 2000)‘ Classifying technology policy from an evolutionary perspective',Research policy, 30: 759 75.
You say you want a revolutioon'Science, 322/5902: 664 6. Hu, M.-C. and Mathews, J. A. 2008)‘ China's national innovatiiv capacity',Research policy, 37: 1465 79.
Evolution, institutional structuure and trajectory',Research policy, 40: 917 31. Lv, W. 2007)‘ Enhancing the basic role of knowledge innovattio in the innovation system',China Development Review, 9: 38 47.
System antecedents and institutionalizatioon'Research policy, 34: 894 913. Zhang, C.,Zhihua Zeng, D.,Mako, W. P. and Seward, J. 2009) Promoting Enterprise-Led Innovation in China.
Zhou, P. and Leydesdorff, L. 2006)‘ The emergence of China as a leading nation in science',Research policy, 35:83 104.
A scheme of analysis',Research policy, 37: 407 29. Boschert, K. and Gill, B. 2005)‘ Germany's agri-biotechnology policy:
Analytical and methodological issues',Research policy, 31: 233 45. Chang, M.-Y. 2004) The Change of Taiwan's Agricultural Community(.
the case of biotechnology innovation networks',Research policy, 37: 430 45. Dr. Chip. 2010), Products. Dr. Chip:<
Giesecke, S. 2000)‘ The contrasting roles of government in the development of biotechnology industry in the US and Germany',Research policy, 29: 205 23.
Kaiser, R. and Prange, H. 2004)‘ The reconfiguration of national innovation systems the example of German biotechnoology'Research policy, 33: 395 408.
Malerba, F. 2002)‘ Sectoral systems of innovation and productioon'Research policy, 31: 247 64..(2004)‘ Sectoral systems of innovation:
Towards an integrated framework',Research policy, 37: 596 615. Mckelvey, M. 1996) Evolutionary Innovations: The Business of Biotechnology.
A scheme of analysis',Research policy, 37: 407 29. Boden, M.,Cagnin, C.,Carabias, V.,Haegeman, K. and Ko nno la, T. 2010)‘ Facing the future:
Designing research policy and strategy with broad aim of selecting priorities for research investments and cooperation of R&i actors.
Grand challennge go beyond the domain of research policy and require structured interactions with a broad range of related policy domains (European research area Board 2009;
Geels, F. W. and Schot, J. 2007)‘ Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways',Research policy, 36: 399 417.164.
The construction of complex products and systems',Research policy, 29: 955 72. Geels, F. W. 2002)‘ Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes:
A multilevel perspective and a case study',Research policy, 31: 1257 74..(2004)‘ From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems.
Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory',Research policy, 33: 897 920..(2005)‘ Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations:
Geels, F. W. and Schot, J. 2007)‘ Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways',Research policy, 36: 399 417.
Historically, research policies have emerged through development paths that reflect the societal contexts of their path-dependent technoinstittutiona co-evolution.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011
