IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mgt/youmng/v14y2019i3p219-236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Impacts of Science and Research on the Society: Development, Issues and Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Dusan Lesjak

    (University of Primorska and International School of Social and Business Studies, Slovenia)

Abstract

In the last three-hundred years, the role of research for the technological progress is undeniable. Successful societies have mechanisms for a quality knowledge transfer into the economy and society. As we are all aware off, scientific and research activities are not intended for themselves, therefore scientific and research results as well as the socio-economic impacts of the results are important too. The paper covers the analysis of socio-economic impacts of research that can be divided into economic, political/social, educational and other. A literature review demonstrates the great importance of the socio-economic impacts of the public funding of science and research. There is a number of developed and successful methods to maximize the socio-economic effects on research and development, consequently, numerous documented cases of good practice in the world. This allows for good management of research projects, from their preparation, implementation to completion, and later dissemination of results and transfer to the economy and non-economy. In the paper, we firstly discuss the history of measuring the impacts of results of science and research, than the assessment of the socio-economic effects of the research and issues related to that. The international waymarks of planning and monitoring of the research effects are presented as well. Finally, some suggestions for solutions to how to deal with measuring the impacts of research results are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Dusan Lesjak, 2019. "Measuring Impacts of Science and Research on the Society: Development, Issues and Solutions," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 14(3), pages 219-236.
    • Handle: RePEc:mgt:youmng:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:219-236
    DOI: 10.26493/1854-4231.14.219-236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hippocampus.si/ISSN/1854-4231/14.219-236.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26493/1854-4231.14.219-236?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Nightingale & Alister Scott, 2007. "Peer review and the relevance gap: Ten suggestions for policy-makers," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 543-553, October.
    2. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    3. Sam Garrett-Jones, 2000. "International trends in evaluating university research outcomes: what lessons for Australia?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 115-124, August.
    4. Gibbons, Michael & Johnston, Ron, 1974. "The roles of science in technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 220-242, November.
    5. J Britt Holbrook & Robert Frodeman, 2011. "Peer review and the ex ante assessment of societal impacts," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 239-246, September.
    6. Steve Hanney & Andrew Davies & Martin Buxton, 1999. "Assessing benefits from health research projects: can we use questionnaires instead of case studies?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 189-199, December.
    7. Susan E Cozzens & Kamau Bobb & Isabel Bortagaray, 2002. "Evaluating the distributional consequences of science and technology policies and programs," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 101-107, August.
    8. Ronald N. Kostoff, 1994. "Federal research impact assessment: State‐of‐the‐art," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 45(6), pages 428-440, July.
    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. Tina Zitko & Borut Likar, 2020. "Analysis of Collaboration between Enterprises and Public Research Organisations on Co-Financed Research-and-Development Projects," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 18(3 (Fall)), pages 211-236.

    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. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    2. Basse Mama, Houdou, 2018. "Nonlinear capital market payoffs to science-led innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1084-1095.
    3. Jürgen Janger, 2015. "Business Science Links For a New Growth Path. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 107," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58413.
    4. Marina Ranga, 2012. "Stimulating R&D and Innovation to Address Romania's Economic Crisis: A Bridge Too Far?," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(9), pages 1497-1523, July.
    5. Oscar LLOPIS & Joaquin AZAGRA-CARO, 2015. "Who do you care about? Scientists’ personality traits and perceived beneficiary impact," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-29, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    6. James A. Cunningham & Vincent Mangematin & Conor O’Kane & Paul O’Reilly, 2016. "At the frontiers of scientific advancement: the factors that influence scientists to become or choose to become publicly funded principal investigators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 778-797, August.
    7. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    8. Ann-Kathrine Ejsing & Ulrich Kaiser & Hans Christian Kongsted & Keld Laursen, 2013. "The Role of University Scientist Mobility for Industrial Innovation," Working Papers 332, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    9. Kroll, Henning & Hansmeier, Hendrik & Hufnagl, Miriam, 2022. "Productive interactions in basic research an enquiry into impact pathways at the DESY synchrotron," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    10. Caitlin Drummond Otten & Baruch Fischhoff, 2022. "Assessing broader impacts of funded research: the US National Science Foundation v. Lamar Smith [What is Societal Impact of Research and How Can it Be Assessed? A Literature Survey]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 313-323.
    11. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Filippo Chiarello & Gualtiero Fantoni, 2021. "Impact for whom? Mapping the users of public research with lexicon-based text mining," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1745-1774, February.
    12. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    14. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    15. Perkmann, Markus & Walsh, Kathryn, 2008. "Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1884-1891, December.
    16. Matteo Pedrini & Valentina Langella & Mario Alberto Battaglia & Paola Zaratin, 2018. "Assessing the health research’s social impact: a systematic review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1227-1250, March.
    17. Bishop, Kate & D'Este, Pablo & Neely, Andy, 2011. "Gaining from interactions with universities: Multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 30-40, February.
    18. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How should the societal impact of research be generated and measured? A proposal for a simple and practicable approach to allow interdisciplinary comparisons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 211-219, January.
    19. Zellner, Christian, 2003. "The economic effects of basic research: evidence for embodied knowledge transfer via scientists' migration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1881-1895, December.
    20. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schneller, Olivier, 2010. "Optimal Mix of Applied and Basic Research, Distance to Frontier, and Openness," CEPR Discussion Papers 7795, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:mgt:youmng:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:219-236. 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: Alen Jezovnik (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmkupsi.html .

    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.