scholarly journals Engaging with policy practitioners to promote institutionalisation of public participation in science, technology and innovation policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (04) ◽  
pp. N01
Author(s):  
Mitsuru Kudo ◽  
Go Yoshizawa ◽  
Kei Kano
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Policy Making Process ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Science Technology And Innovation

This paper is a reflective account of a public participation project the authors conducted in Japan in 2012–2015, as part of the central government's initiative for evidence-based policy-making. The reflection focusses on three key aspects of the project: setting a precedent of involving public participation in policy-making; embedding an official mechanism for public participation in policy-making process; and raising policy practitioners' awareness of public participation. We also discuss why we think engaging with policy practitioners, while problematic in various ways, is and will continue to be important in promoting institutionalised practice of public participation.

scholarly journals Flanders Ahead, Wallonia Behind (But Catching Up): Reconstructing Communities Through Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy Making

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 185-198
Author(s):  
Michiel Van Oudheusden ◽  
Nathan Charlier ◽  
Pierre Delvenne
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Documentary Analysis ◽  
Catching Up ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Science Technology And Innovation

Drawing on a documentary analysis of two socioeconomic policy programs, one Flemish (“Vlaanderen in Actie”), the other Walloon (“Marshall Plans”), and a discourse analysis of how these programs are received in one Flemish and one Francophone quality newspaper, this article illustrates how Flanders and Wallonia both seek to become top-performing knowledge-based economies (KBEs). The article discerns a number of discursive repertoires, such as “Catching up,” which policy actors draw on to legitimize or question the transformation of Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs. The “Catching up” repertoire places Flanders resolutely ahead of Wallonia in the global race toward knowledge, excellence, and growth, but suggests that Wallonia may, in due course, overtake Flanders as a top competitive region. Given the expectations and fears that “Catching up” evokes among Flemish and Walloon policy actors, the repertoire serves these actors as a flexible discursive resource to make sense of, and shape, their collective futures and their regional identities. The article’s findings underline the simultaneity of, and the interplay between, globalizing forces and particularizing tendencies, as Flanders and Wallonia develop with a global KBE in region-specific ways.

scholarly journals Mobilizing Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) for Socio-Economic Development: The Experience of Malaysia

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Kanagasundram Thiruchelvam
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
National Innovation System ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Physical Infrastructure ◽  
Technology Upgrading ◽  
Science Technology And Innovation

<div><p>Malaysia has achieved remarkable economic growth for most parts of its history but is finding itself dogged by weak technological dynamism due to structural features of the economy as well as less than satisfactory proficiency in science, technology and innovation (STI). Despite massive investments in creating STI infrastructure, education, physical infrastructure and incentives to support technology upgrading, the stark reality is that the country continues to lag behind the successful latecomers. This paper presents a brief overview on Malaysia’s STI achievements, salient features of the nation’s national innovation system (NIS), the key challenges of its NIS and some recommendations on moving forward. The central theme of the paper is that success in STI is not automatic. It must be made to happen through effective policies promoting innovation as well as innovations in policy-making itself.</p><p>    </p><p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Key words</span>: Malaysia; national innovation system; STI; innovation; policy making</p></div>

scholarly journals The new evidence-based policy: public participation between ‘hard evidence’ and democracy in practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-227
Author(s):  
Helen Pallett
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Hard Evidence ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk

Background:Debates about evidence-based policy (EBP) were revived in the UK in the 2010s in the context of civil service reform and changing practices of policy making, including institutionalisation of public participation in science policy making. Aims and objectives:This paper aims to explore this revival of interest in EBP in the context of the Government-funded public participation programme Sciencewise, which supports and promotes public dialogues in science policy making. It is based on in-depth ethnographic study of the programme during 2013, considering the impacts on Sciencewise practices and working understandings of engaging in the EBP debate. There is a particular focus on the advantages and disadvantages of categorising public participation as a source of evidence-based policy as opposed to presenting participation as a democratic act which is separate from discussions of EBP. Key conclusions:At different times Sciencewise actors moved between these stances in order to gain credibility and attention for their work, and to situate the outcomes of public participation processes in a broader policy context. In some instances the presentation of outputs from public participation processes as legitimate evidence for policy gave them greater influence and enriched broader discussions about the meaning and practice of open policy. However, it also frequently led to their dismissal on methodological grounds, inhibiting serious engagement with their outputs and challenging internal frameworks for evaluation and learning.

Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy: Old Patterns and New Challenges

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Chaminade ◽  
Bengt-Åke Lundvall
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Market Failure ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Global Knowledge ◽  
Critical Question ◽  
Scientific Advance ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Science Technology And Innovation

Scientific advance and innovation are major sources of economic growth and are crucial for making development socially and environmentally sustainable. A critical question is: Will private enterprises invest sufficiently in research technological development and innovation and, if not, to what degree and how should governments engage in the support of science, technology, and innovation? While neoclassical economists point to market failure as the main rationale for innovation policy, evolutionary economists point to the role of government in building stronger innovation systems and creating wider opportunities for innovation. Research shows that the transmission mechanisms between scientific advance and innovation are complex and indirect. There are other equally important sources of innovation including experience-based learning. Innovation is increasingly seen as a systemic process, where the feedback from users needs to be taken into account when designing public policy. Science and innovation policy may aim at accelerating knowledge production along well-established trajectories, or it may aim at giving new direction to the production and use of knowledge. It may be focused exclusively on economic growth, or it may give attention to impact on social inclusion and the natural environment. An emerging topic is to what extent national perspectives continue to be relevant in a globalizing learning economy facing multiple global complex challenges, including the issue of climate change. Scholars point to a movement toward transformative innovation policy and global knowledge sharing as a response to current challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document