Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda

Hessels, Laurens K.; Lente, Harro van

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.008

Cited by 567 publications

(420 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

349

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…tax payers) money. In a society where science and innovation become increasingly more accountable to the general public (Gibbons, Limoges et al 1994;Hessels and van Lente 2008), making legitimate decisions about funds becomes increasingly important (Van Merkerk and Robinson 2006). Therefore actors that decide about the distribution of public funds need to act as 'legitimacy maximizing' agents.…”

Section: Innovation Policy and Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to empirically examine the influence of different types of credibility on the legitimacy to grant individual actors within consortia an innovation subsidy. Theorizing from the resource dependence view and the sociology of expectations, we hypothesize that four types of credibility are related to legitimacy: scientific credibility, market credibility, expectation track record, and social capital. Further, we operate on two levels of analysis, the actor and the consortium level. Empirically, we quantitatively analyze the Dutch electric vehicle subsidy program as a case study. We develop a model that accurately forecasts which consortia are most likely to receive subsidies. We demonstrate that social capital and market credibility positively influence the likelihood of receiving innovation subsidies, while scientific credibility sources and expectation track record have a negative influence. Based on these findings we provide policy recommendations and avenues for further research.Jelcodes:O38,- Credibility and legitimacy in policy driven innovation networks: Resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies AbstractThe aim of this paper is to empirically examine the influence of different types of credibility on the legitimacy to grant individual actors within consortia an innovation subsidy. Theorizing from the resource dependence view and the sociology of expectations, we hypothesize that four types of credibility are related to legitimacy: scientific credibility, market credibility, expectation track record, and social capital. Further, we operate on two levels of analysis, the actor and the consortium level.Empirically, we quantitatively analyze the Dutch electric vehicle subsidy program as a case study. We develop a model that accurately forecasts which consortia are most likely to receive subsidies. We demonstrate that social capital and market credibility positively influence the likelihood of receiving innovation subsidies, while scientific credibility sources and expectation track record have a negative influence. Based on these findings we provide policy recommendations and avenues for further research.

show abstract

Section: Innovation Policy and Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within the RDV, many scholars have researched the formation of inter organizational 4 relationships or innovation networks between firms (see Hillman, Withers et al 2009 for an overview) and to a lesser extent between science and industry (Van Rijnsoever, Hessels et al 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This shift in practices goes by many names like Mode 2 science, post-normal science, or post-academic science (for a review, see Hessels and Van Lente [21]). The point here is that neither scientific nor engineering codes of conduct quite cover the new types of research practices that have begun to emerge in the aforementioned areas of research.…”

Section: Reconsidering the Principles Of Scientific Conductmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice—A Case Study

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Widespread enthusiasm for establishing scientific codes of conduct notwithstanding, the utility of such codes in influencing scientific practice is not self-evident. It largely depends on the implementation phase following their establishment-a phase which often receives little attention. The aim of this paper is to provide recommendations for guiding effective implementation through an assessment of one particular code of conduct in one particular institute. Based on a series of interviews held with researchers at the Department of Biotechnology of Delft University of Technology, this paper evaluates how the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice is received by those it is supposed to govern. While respondents agreed that discussion of the guiding principles of scientific conduct is called for, they did not consider the code as such to be a useful instrument. As a tool for the individual scientific practitioner, the code leaves a number of important questions unanswered in relation to visibility, enforcement, integration with daily practice and the distribution of responsibility. Recommendations are provided on the basis of these questions. There is more at stake than merely holding scientific practitioners to a proper exercise of their duties; implementation of scientific society

show abstract

“…The change in dynamics in these techno-science-market developments perhaps resembles more closely Schumpeter's (1943) shift from Mark-I to Mark-II (Freeman and Soete 1997) than the notion of a global (that is, system-wide) transition from Mode-1 to Mode-2 research that has hitherto prevailed in science-policy discussions (Hessels and Van Lente 2008). The process of bottom-up construction can gradually become inverted as the overlay of communications and exchanges above the level of local activities gains momentum and develops its own dynamics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociological and Communication-Theoretical Perspectives on the Commercialization of the Sciences

Leydesdorff

2012

Sci & Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both self-organization and organization are important for the further development of the sciences: the two dynamics condition and enable each other. Commercial and public considerations can interact and ''interpenetrate'' in historical organization; different codes of communication are then ''recombined''. However, self-organization in the symbolically generalized codes of communication can be expected to operate at the global level. The Triple Helix model allows for both a neo-institutional appreciation in terms of historical networks of university-industry-government relations and a neo-evolutionary interpretation in terms of three functions: (1) novelty production, (2) wealth generation, and (3) political control. Using this model, one can appreciate both subdynamics. The mutual information in three dimensions enables us to measure the trade-off between organization and self-organization as a possible synergy. The question of optimization between commercial and public interests in the different sciences can thus be made empirical.

show abstract

Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda

Cited by 567 publications

References 43 publications

Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies

Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies

Implementing the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice—A Case Study

Sociological and Communication-Theoretical Perspectives on the Commercialization of the Sciences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About