Abstract
Many recent discussions of state science and technology policies in OECD economies since the end of the Second World War have distinguished a number of distant phases or ‘paradigms’ (Ruivo 1994) in state-science relations, which reflected both different perceptions of the role of scientific research in industrialised societies and changes in the size and complexity of the public science systems (see e.g. Brooks 1990; Freeman and Soete 1997: 374-395; Martin 2003).
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Research Organisation
- Knowledge Production
- Scientific Field
- Academic System
- Research Assessment Exercise
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Becher, Tony and Paul Trowler (2001), Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines, Buckingham: Open University Press and the Society for Research into Higher Education. Second edition.
Block, Hans-Juergen (1990), ‘The University Systems in Transition: Possibilities and limitations of universities in the ‘steady state’, in Susan E. Cozzens, Peter Healey, Arie Rip and John Ziman (eds.), The Research System in Transition, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 35-50.
Braun, Dietmar (1998), ‘The Role of Funding Agencies in the Cognitive Development of Science’, Research Policy, 27, 807-821.
Braun, Dietmar (2003), ‘Lasting Tensions in research Policy-Making – A delegation problem’, Science and Public Policy, 30, 309-321.
Brooks, Harvey (1990), ‘Lessons of History: Successive challenges to science policy’, in Susan E. Cozzens, Peter Healey, Arie Rip and John Ziman (eds.), The Research System in Transition, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 11-22.
Campbell, David F. J. (2003), ‘The Evaluation of University Research in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, Germany and Austria’, in Philip Shapira and Stefan Kuhlmann (eds.), Learning from Science and Technology Policy Evaluation. Experiences from the United States and Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 98-131.
Casper, Steven (2000), ‘Institutional Adaptiveness, Technology policy and the Diffusion of New Business Models: The Case of German Biotechnology’, Organization Studies, 2, 887-914.
Casper, Steven (2006), ‘How Do Technology Clusters Emerge and Become Sustainable? Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster’, Working Paper: Keck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences.
Casper, Steven and Richard Whitley (2004), ‘Managing Competences in Entrepreneurial Technology Firms: A comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK’, Research Policy, 33, 89-106.
Clark, Burton R. (1995), Places of Inquiry: Research and advanced education in modern universities, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Coleman, Samuel (1999), Japanese Science: View from the inside, London: Routledge.
Cozzens, Susan E. (1990), ‘Options for the Future of Research Evaluation’, in Susan E. Cozzens, Peter Healey, Arie Rip and John Ziman (eds.), The Research System in Transition, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 281-294.
Dasgupta, Partha and Paul A. David (1994), ‘Toward a New Economics of Science’, Research Policy, 23, 487-521.
Drori, Gili S., John W. Meyer, Francisco O. Ramirez and Evan Schofer (2003), Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and globalization, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Freeman, Christopher and Luc Soete (1997), The Economics of Industrial Innovation, London: Pinter.
Gaughan, Monica and Stephane Robin (2004), ‘National Science Training Policy and Early Scientific Careers in France and the United States’, Research Policy, 33, 569-581.
Hallam, A. (1973), A Revolution in the Earth Sciences: From continental drift to plate tectonics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hansen, Hanne Foss and Finn Borum (1999), ‘The Construction and Standardization of Evaluation: The case of the Danish university sector’. Evaluation, 5, 303-329.
Kenney, Martin (ed.) (2000), Understanding Silicon Valley: The anatomy of an entrepreneurial region, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langfeldt, Liv (2001), ‘The Decision-Making Constraints and Processes of Grant Peer Review, and Their Effects on the Review Outcome’. Social Studies of Science, 31, 820-841.
Liefner, Ingo (2003), ‘Funding, resources allocation, and performance in Higher Education Systems’, Higher Education, 46, 469-489.
Marginson, Simon and Mark Considine (2000), The Enterprise University: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, Ben (2003), ‘The Changing Social Contract for Science and the Evolution of the University’, in Aldo Geuna, Ammon J. Salter and W. Edward Steinmuller (eds.), Science and Innovation: Rethinking the rationales for funding and governance, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 7-29.
Martin, Ben and Aldo Geuna (2003), ‘University Research Evaluation and Funding: An international comparison’. Minerva, 41, 277-304.
Metcalfe, J. Stanley and Andrew James (2000), ‘Knowledge and Capabilities: A new view of the firm’, in Nicolai Foss and Paul Robertson (eds.), Resources, Technology and Strategy: Explorations in the resource based perspective, London: Routledge, pp. 31-52.
Mowery, David C. (1999), ‘The Computer Software Industry’, in David C. Mowery and Richard R. Nelson (eds.), Sources of Industrial Leadership, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 133-168.
Mowery, David C., Richard R. Nelson, Bhaven N. Sampat and Arvids A. Ziedonis (2004), Ivory Tower and Industrial Innovation: University-Industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole Act, Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Muller-Camen, Michael and Stefan Salzgeber (2005), ‘Changes in Academic Work and the Chair Regime: The case of German business administration academics’, Organization Studies, 26, 271-290.
Penrose, Edith (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: Blackwell.
Pfeffer, Jeffrey (1993), ‘Barriers to the Advance of Organization Science’. Academy of Management Review, 18, 599-620.
Ruivo, Beatriz (1994), “Phases’ or ‘Paradigms’ of Science Policy?’, Science and Public Policy, 21, 157-164.
Sienko, Tanya (1997), A Comparison of Japanese and U.S. Graduate Programs in Science and Engineering, Tokyo: National Institute of Science and Technology Policy, Discussion Paper no. 3.
Stokes, Donald E. (1997), Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation, Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
Tabil, Ameen Ali (2001), ‘The Continued Behavioural Modification of Academics since the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise’, Higher Education Review, 33, 30-46.
Van der Meulen, Barend and Loet Leydesdorff (1991), ‘Has the Study of Philosophy and Dutch Universities Changed under Economic and Political Pressure?’, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 16, 288-321.
Whitley, Richard (2000), The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Oxford University Press. Second edition.
Whitley, Richard (2003a), ‘Competition and Pluralism in the Public Sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science’, Research Policy, 32, 1015-1029.
Whitley, Richard (2003b), ‘The Institutional Structuring of Organisational Capabilities: The role of authority sharing and organisational careers’, Organization Studies, 24, 667-695.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Whitley, R. (2007). Changing Governance of the Public Sciences. In: Whitley, R., Gläser, J. (eds) The Changing Governance of the Sciences. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, vol 26. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6746-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6746-4_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6745-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6746-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawHistory (R0)