IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v30y2003i5p371-381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Principals, agents and research programmes

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Shove

Abstract

Research programmes appear to represent one of the more powerful instruments through which research funders (principals) steer and shape what researchers (agents) do. The fact that agents navigate between different sources and styles of programme funding and that they use programmes to their own ends is readily accommodated within principal-agent theory with the help of concepts such as shirking and defection. Taking a different route, I use three examples of research programming (by the UK, the European Union and the European Science Foundation) to argue that principal-agent theory cannot capture the cumulative and collective consequences of the relationships it seeks to describe. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Shove, 2003. "Principals, agents and research programmes," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(5), pages 371-381, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:30:y:2003:i:5:p:371-381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154303781780308
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bianca Potì & Emanuela Reale, 2007. "Government R&D funding: new approaches in the allocation policies for public and private beneficiaries," CERIS Working Paper 200709, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    2. de Jong, Stefan P.L. & Wardenaar, Tjerk & Horlings, Edwin, 2016. "Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1397-1409.
    3. Lepori, Benedetto, 2011. "Coordination modes in public funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 355-367, April.
    4. Seolmin Yang & So Young Kim, 2023. "Knowledge-integrated research is more disruptive when supported by homogeneous funding sources: a case of US federally funded research in biomedical and life sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3257-3282, June.
    5. Bruce Currie-Alder & Rigas Arvanitis & Sari Hanafi, 2018. "Research in Arabic-speaking countries: Funding competitions, international collaboration, and career incentives," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 74-82.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:30:y:2003:i:5:p:371-381. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.