No abstract

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:393177 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -How to derive policy implications from five future scenarios of transformed research and innovation (R&I) systems? This paper analyzes methodological and content issues of five future scenarios of transformed R&I systems. The aim of this paper is to provide an outlook on strategic policies capable of facilitating or moderating these transformative changes in R&I practices is discussed in light of overarching intentions to foster "responsible" ambitions (in Europe and beyond, discussed as responsible research and innovation, RRI). Design/methodology/approach -The paper elaborates a four-step methodology to assess the scenario's policy implications: first, by articulating the scenario implications for six core dimensions of R&I systems; second, an RRI assessment framework is developed to assess in each scenario opportunities and limitations for transforming R&I systems towards responsibility goals; the third involves a cross-scenario analysis of similarities and differences between the scenarios, allowing the identification of robust policy options that make sense in more than one scenario. The last analytical step includes again the richness of the individual scenario assessments aiming to provide a broader outlook on transformative policy orientations. Findings -The paper concludes with outlining the contours of a future-responsible R&I system together with some suggestions for transformative policy orientations that aim to govern the R&I system towards such a future, as a source of inspiration and reflection. Research limitations/implications -The analysis is based on five future scenarios that do not systematically cover future developments external to the R&I system. Practical Implications -An outlook of strategic policies capable of facilitating or moderating these transformative changes in R&I practices is discussed in light of the overarching European Union goal of encouraging the performance of RRI. Originality/value -This paper provides inspirational anticipatory strategic intelligence for fostering the responsible ambitions of research with and for ...

This article examines the ways in which International Scientific Collaboration, as observed by the co-authorship of journal articles written by local scientists and partners located overseas, affects the ability of research teams to produce bibliographic outputs and to contribute to local knowledge. A sample of 672 teams was randomly selected for the analyses. In addition, 20 interviews with experts and team members were administered to discuss models and results. Results show that co-authoring with partners located overseas increases team output by nearly 40% and by between three and five bibliographic products. It also shows that a team's odds of involving Colombia in its research process are 2.2 times larger for those co-authoring with a partner located overseas than for those that do not. Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.

This special issue intends to explore and fuel current debate on the role technological innovation, as well as social innovation, is playing or could play in developing countries to foster social inclusion, the alleviation of poverty, and the reduction of inequality. The focus is on the extent to which local public policies are explicitly contributing to these goals. Claims for a more responsive role of governments to address long-standing problems affecting the most vulnerable population in developing countries are on the rise due to a generalized perception, unjustified or not, that policy makers are not paying enough attention to what the knowledge society entails and has to offer and on the ways it could be operationalized in order to meet basic needs.Economic growth coexists with increasing inequality. Furthermore, innovation can be linked to increasing inequalities at all levels. 1 This is not only true for the developing world but also for developed countries, which could learn from ongoing efforts to address the challenges in the former countries. In spite of incommensurable differences between the way innovation processes occur in developed and developing countries, the functioning of the systems, the markets, the demand for innovation, and the role of the state, common questions arise in the quest for models and answers: Why does inequality increase and how could innovation contribute to close the gap of inequality and lead to social inclusion? What happens with the conceptual, theoretical, and/or policy models that are in place? What models would better serve this purpose and where should we look for new alternatives?What seems to be clear is that there is a need to better understand how to pursue innovation processes that systemically lead to sustainable and inclusive development processes and what policy choices and settings could lead to innovation-driven inclusive development. There is a need to learn what the drivers and triggers of these dynamics are, what factors could nurture a virtuous relationship between innovation and social inclusion and sustainability, what policy settings should be created. Do these matters belong to the science, technology, and innovation policy domain or should they cut across different policy domains? To what extent? What policy arrangements, institutional designs, and tools could best nurture innovation processes that are oriented toward inclusiveness and sustainability? bs_bs_banner 669