IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v50y2023i1p87-101..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy seduction and governance resistance? Examining public funding agencies and academic institutions on decarbonisation research

Author

Listed:
  • Abbas Abdul

Abstract

Public research funding is a critical instrument in technology and social innovation. This paper explores the emerging themes and topical trends that commonly influence interdisciplinary research within a sample of global research projects, including reviewing a recent study of 1,000 projects used in the selection of expert interview participants (n = 15). It examines the extent to which research funding agencies and academic institutions are shifting research priorities in the energy and climate change domain. It asks: What challenges does interdisciplinary research raise? The study reveals how cross-disciplinary research funding focuses on or fails to address the themes of sustainable development goals. In addition, it emphasises policy seduction and difficulty (resistance) in understanding cross-disciplinary methods in research and how research collaborations promote (or fail to promote) global South institutions and topics. Finally, the paper recommends that research funding needs involve a broader array of stakeholders in industrial decarbonisation research, including policymakers, industries, and citizens.

Suggested Citation

  • Abbas Abdul, 2023. "Policy seduction and governance resistance? Examining public funding agencies and academic institutions on decarbonisation research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 87-101.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:1:p:87-101.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scac051
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Viner, Neil & Powell, Philip & Green, Rod, 2004. "Institutionalized biases in the award of research grants: a preliminary analysis revisiting the principle of accumulative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 443-454, April.
    2. Aleksandra Bączkiewicz & Jakub Dagil & Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Karol Urbaniak & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Is the Distribution of Research Grants Sustainable? An Empirical Study of Grant Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-59, August.
    3. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    4. Yuliia Maksymiv & Valentyna Yakubiv & Nadia Pylypiv & Iryna Hryhoruk & Iryna Piatnychuk & Nazariy Popadynets, 2021. "Strategic Challenges for Sustainable Governance of the Bioeconomy: Preventing Conflict between SDGs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-12, July.
    5. Catherine Lyall & Ann Bruce & Wendy Marsden & Laura Meagher, 2013. "The role of funding agencies in creating interdisciplinary knowledge," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 62-71, January.
    6. van den Besselaar, Peter & Sandström, Ulf, 2015. "Early career grants, performance, and careers: A study on predictive validity of grant decisions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 826-838.
    7. Duncan Thomas & Maria Nedeva, 2012. "Characterizing researchers to study research funding agency impacts: The case of the European Research Council's Starting Grants," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 257-269, September.
    8. Laudel, Grit & Gläser, Jochen, 2014. "Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1204-1216.
    9. Buenstorf, Guido & Koenig, Johannes, 2020. "Interrelated funding streams in a multi-funder university system: Evidence from the German Exzellenzinitiative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    10. Chux U. Daniels & Olga Ustyuzhantseva & Wei Yao, 2017. "Innovation for inclusive development, public policy support and triple helix: perspectives from BRICS," African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(5), pages 513-527, September.
    11. Mattia Manni & Valentina Coccia & Diletta Paoletti & Fabio Raspadori & Timo Ritonummi & Franco Cotana, 2020. "Shaping Multi-Level Energy and Climate Policy within the SET Plan Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    12. Ricardo M. Pino, 2018. "Regional innovation systems: Systematic literature review and recommendations for future research," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1463606-146, January.
    13. Polzin, Friedemann & Egli, Florian & Steffen, Bjarne & Schmidt, Tobias S., 2019. "How do policies mobilize private finance for renewable energy?—A systematic review with an investor perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1249-1268.
    14. Sylvia I. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen & Lars Friberg & Edoardo Saccenti, 2017. "Read all about it!? Public accountability, fragmented global climate governance and the media," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(8), pages 982-997, November.
    15. repec:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:3:p:392-403. is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2021. "The impact of public funding on science valorisation: an analysis of the ERC Proof-of-Concept Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    17. Geuna, Aldo & Piolatto, Matteo, 2016. "Research assessment in the UK and Italy: Costly and difficult, but probably worth it (at least for a while)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 260-271.
    18. Spanos, Yiannis E., 2021. "Exploring heterogeneous returns to collaborative R&D: A marginal treatment effects perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    19. Bolli, Thomas & Somogyi, Frank, 2011. "Do competitively acquired funds induce universities to increase productivity?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 136-147, February.
    20. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    21. Núria Bautista-Puig & Carlos García-Zorita & Elba Mauleón, 2019. "European Research Council: excellence and leadership over time from a gender perspective," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 370-382.
    22. Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann) & O’Donohue, Wayne, 2016. "Progress in innovation and knowledge management research: From incremental to transformative innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1610-1614.
    23. Shogo Katoh & Rick (H.L.) Aalbers & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Effects and Interactions of Researcher’s Motivation and Personality in Promoting Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lawson, Cornelia & Salter, Ammon, 2023. "Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    2. AbdulRafiu, Abbas & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Daniels, Chux, 2022. "The dynamics of global public research funding on climate change, energy, transport, and industrial decarbonisation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    3. Albert Banal-Estañol & Qianshuo Liu & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2021. "Similar-to-me Effects in the Grant Application Process: Applicants, Panelists, and the Likelihood of Obtaining Funds," Working Papers 1289, Barcelona School of Economics.
    4. Chiara Franzoni & Paula Stephan & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2022. "Funding Risky Research," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 103-133.
    5. Conor O’Kane & Jing A. Zhang & Jarrod Haar & James A. Cunningham, 2023. "How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 799-826, August.
    6. Civera, Alice & Lehmann, Erik E. & Paleari, Stefano & Stockinger, Sarah A.E., 2020. "Higher education policy: Why hope for quality when rewarding quantity?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    7. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castillo, 2019. "Funding academic research: grant application, partnership, award, and output," Economics Working Papers 1658, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Amara, Nabil & Rhaiem, Mehdi & Halilem, Norrin, 2020. "Assessing the research efficiency of Canadian scholars in the management field: Evidence from the DEA and fsQCA," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 296-306.
    9. Kevin W. Boyack & Caleb Smith & Richard Klavans, 2018. "Toward predicting research proposal success," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 449-461, February.
    10. Grimpe, Christoph, 2012. "Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies: Beggars cannot be choosers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1448-1460.
    11. Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau & Ana Wheelock & Tushna Vandrevala & Priscilla Harries, 2022. "Peer reviewers’ dilemmas: a qualitative exploration of decisional conflict in the evaluation of grant applications in the medical humanities and social sciences," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Yu, Nannan & Dong, Yueyan & de Jong, Martin, 2022. "A helping hand from the government? How public research funding affects academic output in less-prestigious universities in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    13. Sandström, Ulf & Van den Besselaar, Peter, 2018. "Funding, evaluation, and the performance of national research systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 365-384.
    14. Cantner, Uwe & Grashof, Nils & Grebel, Thomas & Zhang, Xijie, 2023. "When Excellence is not Excellent: The Impact of the Excellence Initiative on the Relative Productivity of German Universities," MPRA Paper 118139, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Finardi, Ugo, 2021. "The funding-productivity-gender nexus in science, a multistage analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    16. Stefano Bianchini & Patrick Llerena & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Emre Özel, 2022. "Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    17. Claartje J Vinkenburg & Sara Connolly & Stefan Fuchs & Channah Herschberg & Brigitte Schels, 2020. "Mapping career patterns in research: A sequence analysis of career histories of ERC applicants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    18. Walker, James & Brewster, Chris & Fontinha, Rita & Haak-Saheem, Washika & Benigni, Stefano & Lamperti, Fabio & Ribaudo, Dalila, 2022. "The unintended consequences of the pandemic on non-pandemic research activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    19. Emre Özel, 2024. "What is Gender Bias in Grant Peer review?," Working Papers halshs-03862027, HAL.
    20. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi, 2017. "The determinants of research performance in European universities: a large scale multilevel analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1147-1178, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:1:p:87-101.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.