for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help

 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

  Subjects -> SOCIAL SERVICES AND WELFARE (Total: 199 journals)
The end of the list has been reached or no journals were found for your choice.
Journal Cover Science and Public Policy
  [SJR: 0.623]   [H-I: 42]   [48 followers]  Follow
    
   Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
   ISSN (Print) 0302-3427 - ISSN (Online) 1471-5430
   Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [370 journals]
  • A new direction for innovation studies? Reconciling the ordinary and
           the extraordinary
    • Authors: Hawkins R.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection">A new direction for innovation studies? Reconciling the ordinary and the extraordinary <span style="font-style:italic;">Common Innovation: How We Create the Wealth of Nations</span> by SwannG. M. Peter, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 2014, x + 262 pages, US$125 (hardback), ISBN 9781847200501</span>
      PubDate: 2017-03-10
       
  • The effectiveness of social science research in addressing societal
           problems: Broadening participation in computing
    • Authors: Rosenbloom JL; Ginther DK.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>One important rationale for federal funding of social science research is its role in addressing pressing social problems. In this article we examine the impact of the National Science Foundation’s Information Technology Workforce Program (ITWF) on broadening participation in computing and IT careers. Established in 2000 in response to the declining participation of women and minorities in computer science education and IT careers, the ITWF Program awarded almost US$30 million in research funding through its final solicitation in 2004. We document the quantitative and qualitative effects of this research funding, both to illustrate the complex ways in which R&D funding can advance scientific understanding and to identify the challenges that such problem-driven social science research may encounter. The problem of diversity in the IT workforce has not been solved. Nonetheless, the ITWF program had important effects on the understanding of this problem and efforts to address it.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-11-10
       
  • EU Research and Innovation Policies as Factors of Convergence or
           Divergence after the Crisis
    • Authors: Izsak K; Radošević S.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>The 2008 global financial and economic crisis has disturbed the evolution of research and innovation (R&I) policies in Europe and it continues to have significant consequences. This article reviews the evolution of and changes in R&I policy funding and measures before and in the aftermath of the crisis, and analyses reactions in three groups: Southern, Central-Eastern, and Northwest European country groups. Based on the analysis of the Erawatch-TrendChart Inventory, we show that the crisis induced three different responses. In Northwest Europe, it induced further support for R&I activities; in Southern Europe it led to the collapse of national public support and its substitution only to some extent by EU Structural Funds; and in Central-Eastern Europe to an apparently much stronger compensation effect. Overall, these trends suggest that R&I policies have operated as a factor of further divergence between Northwest and South, and as potential factor of convergence between Northwest and Central-East.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-10-10
       
  • Socio-technical change linking expectations and representations:
           Innovating thermal treatment of municipal solid waste
    • Authors: Levidow L; Upham P.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>This paper combines two theoretical perspectives: future technological expectations mobilising resources, and social representations assimilating new ideas through anchoring onto familiar frames of reference. The combination is applied to the controversial case of thermal-treatment options for municipal solid waste, especially via gasification technology. Stakeholders’ social representations set criteria for technological expectations and their demonstration requirements, whose fulfilment in turn has helped gasification to gain more favourable representations. Through a differential ‘anchoring’, gasification is represented as matching incineration’s positive features while avoiding its negative ones. Despite their limitations, current two-stage combustion gasifiers are promoted as a crucial transition towards a truly ‘advanced’ form producing a clean syngas: R&D investment reinforces expectations for advancing the technology. Such linkages between technological expectations and social representations may have broader relevance to socio-technical change, especially where public controversy arises over the wider systemic role of an innovation trajectory.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-29
       
  • Measuring the productivity of national R&D systems: Challenges in
           cross-national comparisons of R&D input and publication output
           indicators
    • Authors: Aksnes DW; Sivertsen G, van Leeuwen TN, et al.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>We investigate methodological problems in measuring research productivity at the national level by comparing official R&D statistics from the OECD with publication data from the Web of Science. Data from 18 countries are analysed. This paper problematizes the approach taken in studies where R&D statistics are used as an input variable and publications as an output variable to draw conclusions about the productivity or efficiency of national research and innovation systems. We consider possible pitfalls in such analyses and propose steps that can improve the comparability of these two data sources. We recommend that efforts are made among the OECD member countries to produce more reliable and commensurable international R&D statistics.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-21
       
  • The complex relationship between academic engagement and research output:
           Evidence from Italy
    • Authors: Muscio A; Ramaciotti L, Rizzo U.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>The academic systems of several countries are adapting to the consequences of progressive cuts in public research funding and the increasing engagement of academics in commercial contracts with both the private and public sector. While promoting the so-called third mission and encouraging university–industry collaboration agreements, there is the risk that commercial activities may distract academics from their traditional academic missions of teaching and research. This paper focuses on academic research output in several academic disciplines, expressed in terms of publication and citation numbers. First, we investigate whether and how funding from research contracts and consultancies is related to research output. Secondly, we investigate how internal university policies and norms that regulate university–industry collaboration affect university research output. The empirical evidence is based on an original longitudinal dataset for 2006–2012 on scientific output and research funding for 60 Italian public universities and 173 groups of departments classified by OECD scientific area.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-20
       
  • Quantifying ‘Output’ for Evaluation: Administrative Knowledge Politics
           and Changing Epistemic Cultures in Dutch Law Faculties
    • Authors: Kaltenbrunner W; de Rijcke S.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>In this article, we study the practices through which scholars in advanced administrative positions in Dutch law faculties quantify the publications of their research groups for evaluation purposes. Our aim is to go beyond studying seemingly one-way effects of evaluation modalities on academic knowledge production and instead look at the ‘micropolitics’ of indicator use, that is, the specific ways in which researchers embed indicators in their everyday practices. Metrics of raw publication output provide seemingly clear-cut evidence about academic performance. However, our empirical material shows that such information can hide strikingly diverse quantification practices. Rather than passive reactions to externally-imposed administrative procedures, many of these practices constitute proactive attempts of individual researchers to pursue competing normative and epistemic agendas. Quantitative indicators to measure publication activity thus do not automatically resolve discussions about the nature of academic performance, but relocate them to an administrative setting characterized by specific rules of engagement.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-19
       
  • Understanding the dynamics of global entrepreneurship
    • Authors: Das A.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection">Understanding the dynamics of global entrepreneurship <span style="font-style:italic;">Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives: The Mason Years</span> by ÁcsZoltán J.Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 2015, 672 pages, £130.00 (Hardback), ISBN 9781784718046</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-15
       
  • Incentivizing research collaboration using performance-based reward
           systems
    • Authors: Kim D; Bak H.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>Despite a growing interest in research collaboration, few studies have examined the influences of policy measures on collaboration practices and on the scientific outcome of the research. By analyzing individual-level panel data of researchers in humanities and social sciences in a Korean university, the present study shows that adopting a partial discount system for the number of coauthors, which has been designed in such a way as to reward coauthored publications, could redirect researchers’ attention away from working alone to collaborating with others, as proposed by advocates of team-based incentives in principal–agent theory. In addition, the present study shows that, although collaboration was positively correlated with the impact factors of the journal and the total number of publications, the fractional count of publications, which divides the number of publications by the number of authors, showed a negative relationship with participation in collaboration.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-06
       
  • The UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment: How the rational
           assessment of science develops policy-based evidence
    • Authors: Tangney P.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>This paper describes the views of participants in the UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment, to provide insights into the development and use of scientific evidence for complex social-ecological policy problems like climate adaptation. Interviews confirm that ‘linear-rationalist’ prescriptions commonly used for the <span style="font-style:italic;">ex-ante</span> policy appraisal of science facilitate processes of politicisation, providing a façade of legitimacy behind which the inevitable normative decisions required during evidence development can be safely made for political ends. The UK’s risk assessment was used tactically rather than instrumentally at all levels of government to garner political legitimacy for various policy portfolios. The tactical or political use of evidence occurred overtly, as an aid during policy advocacy, and covertly through the politicisation of expert knowledge. However, the linear-rationalist assessment method was largely inadequate for characterising climate change problems, for making instrumental use of climate science and suppressed broader institutional learning about climate-related policy-making.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-06
       
  • Knowledge acquisition by university researchers through company
           collaborations: Evidence from South Korea
    • Authors: Hemmert M.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>This study contributes to the debate on whether close interaction with industry partners in university–industry research collaborations (UICs) facilitates or hinders the acquisition of scientific knowledge by university researchers. The influence of relational mechanisms between UIC partners on university researchers’ technological and scientific knowledge acquisition is studied for a sample of 295 UICs in South Korea. The strength of pre-existing ties between university and industry partners, their shared project governance and decision process similarity contribute to the technological knowledge acquisition by university researchers. Moreover, the three mechanisms are also positively related to scientific knowledge acquisition indirectly through technological knowledge acquisition. The findings of this study indicate that university researchers can enhance their acquisition not only of technological knowledge, but also of scientific knowledge by developing and maintaining a strong working relationship with company partners in UICs.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-09-01
       
  • Overcoming the triple helix boundaries in an environmental research
           collaboration
    • Authors: Rosenlund J; Rosell E, Hogland W.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>Cross-sector interactions between university and other sectors are increasingly important in contemporary knowledge production. However, there are few guidelines for conducting such interactions at the micro-level. The aim of this paper is to provide a better understanding of such triple helix interactions. Throughout a six-year project there were increased demands on the researchers to develop applied results and to interact with other sectors. The researchers were challenged to cross boundaries and share their knowledge with participants outside academia. Results show that difficulties in micro-level triple helix collaboration can be related to three different boundaries. These difficulties emerged due to the different expectations of knowledge and variations in the sector-specific ways of working. Results also hint at solutions in the form of boundary spanners, boundary management and a common arena for dialogue.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-08-30
       
  • The challenges of enhancing collaboration in life science clusters:
           Lessons from Chicago, Copenhagen and Singapore
    • Authors: Giest S.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>Cluster policy is widely discussed due to the vagueness of the cluster concept and the disagreement among innovation stakeholders and policy-makers on how to address networking dynamics. This paper looks at the increasing number of cluster policies targeting collaboration and the different framing of it as a policy issue by government and stakeholders. Based on interviews in the life science clusters of Chicago, Copenhagen and Singapore, the research finds that network members frame low collaboration levels as an issue that needs to be addressed by adjusting the larger institutional setting while policy-makers focus on the dynamics of the network. The research further shows that different motives drive the demand of certain policy measures: government is concerned with overall economic performance, while companies and research institutes focus on their own success in the network. Both groups find common ground in support for cluster organizations and their ability to connect various stakeholders.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-08-23
       
  • Managing Emerging Technologies for Socio-Economic Impact , edited by
           Dimitris G. Assimakopoulos, Ilan Oshri and Krsto Pandza Edward Elgar,
           Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, 2015, 416 pages, £85.50, US$150.00
           (hardback), ISBN 9781782547877
    • Authors: Stine DD.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><span style="font-style:italic;">Managing Emerging Technologies for Socio-Economic Impact</span>, edited by AssimakopoulosDimitris G., OshriIlan and PandzaKrstoEdward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, 2015, 416 pages, £85.50, US$150.00 (hardback), ISBN 9781782547877</span>
      PubDate: 2016-08-04
       
  • Universities, knowledge exchange and policy: A comparative study of
           Ireland and the UK
    • Authors: Zhang Q; Larkin C, Lucey BM.
      Abstract: <span class="paragraphSection"><div class="boxTitle">Abstract</div>This paper aims to provide one of the first cross-country empirical analyses of the intensity and diversity of knowledge exchange activities by academics. Focusing on the wide perspective of knowledge exchange, the results are based on two large-scale surveys with academics in the UK and Ireland and compare them in terms of: modes of interactions, types of partners, motivations and impacts of interactions, constraints on interactions and mission of higher education perceived by academics. It is found that academics in both countries are involved in a wide range of activities, with intellectual property activities being the interactions that they are least frequently engaged in. However, academics working at Irish and UK universities show distinct patterns of interactions with private sector companies and public sector organisations. Our analysis calls for caution over one country seeking to borrow policies from another without understanding the specific context of the higher education sector.</span>
      PubDate: 2016-08-04
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 54.144.44.17
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-2016