How CSIC researchers in the humanities and social sciences interact with societal agents outside institutional channels?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1165Keywords:
Knowledge transfer and exchange, non-institutional interactions, Social Sciences, Humanities, public research organization, social agents, academic positionAbstract
This paper explores humanities and social sciences (HSS) researchers’ participation in diverse non-institutional interaction activities. To this aim, we use information about the participation of a sample of HSS researchers from the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) in diverse interaction activities with social agents. In addition to highlighting the extent to which HSS researchers engage in non-institutional interaction activities, we analyse how these interactions vary according to a researcher’s academic position and the type of social agent. Our findings are of interest for future initiatives aimed at promoting interactions between science and society in this area.
Downloads
References
Abreu, M.; Grinevich, V. (2013). The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy, vol. 42 (2), 408-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.10.005
Abreu, M.; Grinevich, V.; Hughes, A.; Kitson, M. (2009). Knowledge exchange between academics and the business, public and third sectors. Cambridge: Centre for Business Research and UK-IRC.
Amara, N.;Landry, R.; Halilem, N. (2013). Faculty consulting in natural sciences and engineering: between formal and informal knowledge transfer. Higher Education, vol. 65 (3), 359-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9549-9
Azagra-Caro, J. M. (2007). What type of faculty member interacts with what type of firm? Some reasons for the delocalisation of university-industry interaction. Technovation, vol. 27 (11), 704-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.05.003
Baldini, N.;Grimaldi, R.; Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, vol. 70 (2), 333-354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0206-5
Bate, J. (editor) (2011) The public value of the humanities, London, Bloomsbury.
Boardman, C. P.; Ponomariov, B. L. (2009). University researchers working with private companies. Technovation, vol. 29 (2), 142-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.03.008
Bonaccorsi, A.; Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university industry relationships. R&D Management, vol. 24 (3), 229-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1994.tb00876.x
Braxton, J. M.; Del Favero, M. (2002). Evaluating scholarship performance: Traditional and emergent assessment templates. New Directions for Institutional Research, vol. 2002 (114), 19-32.
British-Academy (2008). Punching our weight: the humanities and social sciences in public policy making. London: The British Academy.
Cohen, W. M.; Nelson, R. R.; Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management science, vol. 48 (1), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.1.1.14273
Crossick, G. (2009). So who now believes in the transfer of widgets? Knowledge Future Conference, Goldsmiths, 16-17 October 2009.
CSIC (2008). Memoria anual 2007. Madrid: CSIC.
CSIC (2012). Memoria anual 2011. Madrid: CSIC.
D'Este, P.; Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, vol. 36 (9), 1295-1313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.05.002
D'Este, P.; Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 36 (3), 316-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z
Donovan, C. (2008). The Australian Research Quality Framework: A live experiment in capturing the social, economic, environmental, and cultural returns of publicly funded research. New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 2008 (118), 47-60.
Göransson, B.; Maharajh, R.; Schmoch, U. (2009). New activities of universities in transfer and extension: multiple requirements and manifold solutions. Science and Public Policy, vol. 36 (2), 157-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/030234209X406863
Grimpe, C.; Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany. The Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 35 (6), 637-650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4
Grimpe, C.; Hussinger, K. (2008) Formal and informal technology transfer from academia to industry: complementarity effects and innovation performance. ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 08-080.
Hessels, L. K.;Van Lente, H.; Smits, R. (2009). In search of relevance: the changing contract between science and society. Science and Public Policy, vol. 36 (5), 387-401. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/030234209X442034
Hughes, A.; Kitson, M. (2012). Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol. 36 (3), 723-750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cje/bes017
Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: 'Gold', 'ribbon' or 'puzzle'? Research Policy, vol. 40 (10), 1354-1368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.002
Landry, R.; Saïhi, M.; Amara, N.; Ouimet, M. (2010). Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities. Research Policy, vol. 39 (10), 1387-1403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.08.003
Lepori, B.; Barré, R.; Filliatreau, G. (2008). New perspectives and challenges for the design and production of S&T indicators. Research Evaluation, vol. 17 (1), 33-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/095820208X291176
Link, A. N.; Siegel, D. S.; Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 16 (4), 641-655. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtm020
Manjarrés-Henríquez, L.; Gutiérrez-Gracia, A.; Carrión-García, A.; Vega-Jurado, J. (2009). The effects of university–industry relationships and academic research on scientific performance: Synergy or substitution? Research in Higher Education, vol. 50 (8), 795-811. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9142-y
Martin, B. (2003). The changing social contract for science and the evolution of the university. En: Geuna, A., Salter, A. J.; Steinmueller, W. E. (editores.) Science and Innovation: Rethinking the rationales for funding and governance. Edward Elgar, Cheltenhan, UK, pp. 7-29.
Meyer-Krahmer, F.; Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, vol. 27 (8), 835-851. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00094-8
Molas-Gallart, J.;Salter, A.;Patel, P.;Scott, A.; Duran, X. (2002). Measuring third stream activities. Brighton: SPRU.
Murray, F. (2004). The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, vol. 33 (4), 643-659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.013
O'Shea, R. P.; Chugh, H.; Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 33 (6), 653-666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9060-0
OECD (2002). Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. Paris: OECD.
Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Benneworth, P.; Castro-Martínez, E. (2013a). Are "STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus"? Challenging disciplinary stereotypes of research's social value. Science and Public Policy.
Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Castro-Martínez, E.; D'Este, P. (2014a). Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents. Research Policy, vol. 43, 696-706. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.12.004
Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Castro-Martínez, E.; Fernández-Esquinas, M. (2014b). Diferencias entre áreas científicas en las prácticas de divulgación de la investigación: un estudio empírico en el CSIC. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, vol. 42 (2).
Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Molas-Gallart, J.; Castro-Martínez, E. (2013b). Informal collaborations between social sciences and humanities researchers and non-academic partners. Science and Public Policy.
Perkmann, M.; Tartari, V.; McKelvey, M.; Autio, E.; Brostrom, A.; D'Este, P.; Fini, R.; Geuna, A.; Grimaldi, R.; Hughes, A.; Krabel, S.; Kitson, M.; Llerena, P.; Lissoni, F.; Salter, A.; Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, vol. 42 (2), 423-442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007
Rothaermel, F. T.; Agung, S. D.; Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and corporate change, vol. 16 (4), 691-791. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtm023
Schartinger, D.; Rammer, C.; Fischer, M. M.; Frohlich, J. (2002). Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy, vol. 31 (3), 303-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00111-1
Stephan, P. E. (1996). The economics of science. Journal of Economic literature, vol. 24 (3), 1199-1235.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
