Science and technology policies: A tale of political use, misuse and abuse of traditional R&D indicators

Abstract

Future political priorities for science and technology (S&T) policy formulation usually rest on a rather simplistic interpretation of past events. This can lead to serious errors and distortions and can negatively affect the innovation system. In this article we try to highlight the riskiness involved in policy making based on traditional R&D indicators and trends. We would emphasise that this approach does not take account of structural aspects crucial for the analysis of the innovation system. We examine the implications for science, technical and human resources policies of the political challenge of R&D convergence in a peripheral EU region. Three scenarios are developed based on application of the same criteria to the trends observed in traditional R&D input indicators.

Exploring Policy-Formulation for SMEs in Cloud Computing: The Case of Turkey

“…However, in developing countries, there is a sense of urgency in policy-making for the issues covered by the information society agenda which is a result of a perceived need to 'catch up' with the rest of the world (Duncan-Howell et al, 2008). The lack of consistency between policy design and the actions proposed to achieve the objectives of the policy may result in an unsustainable environment where the actors loose competitive advantage dramatically (Castro-Martinez et al, 2009, Duncan-Howell et al, 2008, Mollas-Gallart and Davies, 2006. EU, acting as a role model, may advance policy-learning process (Koschatzky, 2009) and also create a benchmark for the creation of favorable conditions.…”

Aprendizaje interactivo en un contexto low-tech: formación profesional e innovación en el caso de Asturias

“…Este subconjunto de regiones menos innovadoras se ha calificado como sistemas regionales "de segundo orden" (Buesa et al, 2002), de sistemas "perifé-ricos" (Castro et al, 2009;Fernández de Lucio et al, 2010;Pinto et al, 2015) o sistemas "más fragmentados" (Alberdi et al, 2014). Estas tipologías muestran que estas regiones son más débiles en algunos de los componentes de los sistemas regionales "de primer orden" o "metropolitanos", bien sea la composición de sus empresas, la dotación de conocimiento innovador, la eficacia de las políticas públicas o de la adecuada conexión entre los componentes o subsistemas de innovación.…”