IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v38y2013i5p565-576.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance measures as forms of evidence for science and technology policy decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Irwin Feller

Abstract

Amidst current widespread calls for evidence based decision making on public investments in science and technological innovation, frequently interpreted to imply the employment of some bundle of output, outcome, productivity, or rate-of-return measures, the promises and limitations of performance measures, singly or collectively, varies greatly across contexts. The promises reflect belief in, scholarly research supportive of, and opportunistic provision of performance measures that respond or cater to executive and legislative branch expectations or hopes that such measures will facilitate evidence-based decision-making. The limitations reflect research on the dynamics of scientific discovery, technological innovation and the links between the two that even when well done and used by adepts, performance measures at best provide limited guidance for future expenditure decisions and at worst are rife with potential for incorrect, faddish, chimerical, and counterproductive decisions. As a decision-making enhancement, performance measurement techniques have problematic value when applied to the Big 3 questions of U.S. science policy: (1) what is the optimal size of the Federal government’s investments in science and technology programs; (2) the allocation of these investments among missions/agencies/and programs (and thus fields of science); and (3) the selection of performers, funding mechanisms, and the criteria used to select projects and performers. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Irwin Feller, 2013. "Performance measures as forms of evidence for science and technology policy decisions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 565-576, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:38:y:2013:i:5:p:565-576
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-012-9264-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-012-9264-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-012-9264-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & David, Paul A. & Foray, Dominique, 2009. "Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: Linking policy research and practice in 'STIG Systems'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 681-693, May.
    3. Heisey, Paul W. & King, John L. & Day-Rubenstein, Kelly A. & Bucks, Dale A. & Welsh, Rick, 2010. "Assessing the Benefits of Public Research Within an Economic Framework: The Case of USDA's Agricultural Research Service," Economic Research Report 94852, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Wesley M. Cohen, 2005. "Patents and Appropriation: Concerns and Evidence-super-1," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 57-71, January.
    5. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans & Katy Börner, 2005. "Mapping the backbone of science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(3), pages 351-374, August.
    6. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    7. Michael J. Boskin & Lawrence J. Lau, 2000. "Generalized Solow-Neutral Technical Progress and Postwar Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 8023, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. John C. Haltiwanger & Ron S. Jarmin & Javier Miranda, 2010. "Who Creates Jobs? Small vs. Large vs. Young," NBER Working Papers 16300, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Donald F. Kettl, 1997. "The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, missing links," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 446-462.
    10. Freeman, Christopher & Soete, Luc, 2009. "Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 583-589, May.
    11. Ulrich Schmoch & Torben Schubert & Dorothea Jansen & Richard Heidler & Regina von Görtz, 2010. "How to use indicators to measure scientific performance: a balanced approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 2-18, March.
    12. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Kevin M. Murphy & Robert H. Topel, 2006. "The Value of Health and Longevity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(5), pages 871-904, October.
    14. Richard B. Freeman & Daniel Goroff, 2009. "Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An Analysis of Markets and Employment," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number free09-1.
    15. Crespi, Gustavo A. & Geuna, Aldo, 2008. "An empirical study of scientific production: A cross country analysis, 1981-2002," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 565-579, May.
    16. Freeman, Richard B. & Goroff, Daniel L (ed.), 2009. "Science and Engineering Careers in the United States," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226261898, October.
    17. Ronald S. Jarmin, 1999. "Evaluating the impact of manufacturing extension on productivity growth," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(1), pages 99-119.
    18. Wesley M. Cohen, 2005. "Patents and Appropriation: Concerns and Evidence," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 217-231, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin Kenney & Donald Patton, 2018. "Sub-national technology policy and commerce: evaluating the impacts of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 47-68, February.
    2. Rafols, Ismael & Stirling, Andy, 2020. "Designing indicators for opening up evaluation. Insights from research assessment," SocArXiv h2fxp, Center for Open Science.
    3. Zhen Zhang & Joshua Hinger & David Audretsch & Guojun Song, 2015. "Environmental technology transfer and emission standards for industry in China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 743-759, October.

    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. Carolina Cañibano & Richard Woolley & Eric J. Iversen & Sybille Hinze & Stefan Hornbostel & Jakob Tesch, 2019. "A conceptual framework for studying science research careers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1964-1992, December.
    2. Hyytinen, Ari & Maliranta, Mika, 2013. "Firm lifecycles and evolution of industry productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1080-1098.
    3. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    4. Aaron Chatterji & Edward Glaeser & William Kerr, 2014. "Clusters of Entrepreneurship and Innovation," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 129-166.
    5. Gersbach, Hans & Sorger, Gerhard & Amon, Christian, 2018. "Hierarchical growth: Basic and applied research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 434-459.
    6. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    7. Kim, Younghwan & Kim, Wonjoon & Yang, Taeyong, 2012. "The effect of the triple helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 154-166.
    8. Sucharita Ghosh & Emanuele Grassi, 2020. "Overeducation and overskilling in the early careers of PhD graduates: Does international migration reduce labour market mismatch?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(4), pages 915-944, August.
    9. Caroline Stiel, 2017. "Modern Public Enterprises: Organisational Innovation and Productivity," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1713, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Fatima M Felisberti & Rebecca Sear, 2014. "Postdoctoral Researchers in the UK: A Snapshot at Factors Affecting Their Research Output," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-7, April.
    11. Yuandi Wang & Ruifeng Hu & Weiping Li & Xiongfeng Pan, 2016. "Does teaching benefit from university–industry collaboration? Investigating the role of academic commercialization and engagement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1037-1055, March.
    12. Timo Tohmo & Jutta Viinikainen, 2017. "Does intersectoral labour mobility pay for academics?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 83-103, October.
    13. Nelson, Andrew J., 2012. "Putting university research in context: Assessing alternative measures of production and diffusion at Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 678-691.
    14. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    15. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    16. Cowan, Robin & Zinovyeva, Natalia, 2013. "University effects on regional innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 788-800.
    17. Kafouros, Mario & Wang, Chengqi & Piperopoulos, Panagiotis & Zhang, Mingshen, 2015. "Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 803-817.
    18. Broström, Anders, 2010. "Working with distant researchers--Distance and content in university-industry interaction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1311-1320, December.
    19. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.
    20. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.

    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:kap:jtecht:v:38:y:2013:i:5:p:565-576. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.