IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v45y2018i1p36-44..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert views on innovation and bureaucratization of science: Semantic network analysis of discourses on scientific governance

Author

Listed:
  • Leo Dhohoon Kim
  • Deok-Ho Jang

Abstract

This article analyzes and compares expert groups’ (science policy experts and field researchers in engineering) perceptions of the national scientific agenda in South Korea. The national agenda seeks to identify the conditions necessary for creativity and innovation. In general, policy experts and field academics share a common notion that investment in human resources and increased interdisciplinary cooperation are prerequisites for global technological competence. However, comparison of semantic network analysis results reveals that policy officials and field scientists differ in their views of how the field of innovation, the academy and laboratory, should be governed and reformed. The analysis implies that more fundamental conditions need to be discussed in scientific governance, especially recognizing the importance of educational reform, encouraging collaborative culture in the academy and empowering a coordinative body in the government. However, these are yet to be included in the public deliberation.

Suggested Citation

  • Leo Dhohoon Kim & Deok-Ho Jang, 2018. "Expert views on innovation and bureaucratization of science: Semantic network analysis of discourses on scientific governance," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 36-44.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:1:p:36-44.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scx035
    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. Roger A. Pielke, 2002. "Policy, politics and perspective," Nature, Nature, vol. 416(6879), pages 367-368, March.
    2. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    3. Lee,Keun, 2013. "Schumpeterian Analysis of Economic Catch-up," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107042681, October.
    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. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    2. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    3. Lütkenhorst, Wilfried, 2018. "Creating wealth without labour? Emerging contours of a new techno-economic landscape," IDOS Discussion Papers 11/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    4. Magdalena Osińska & Tadeusz Kufel & Marcin Błażejowski & Paweł Kufel, 2020. "Modeling mechanism of economic growth using threshold autoregression models," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1381-1430, March.
    5. Kim, Jinhee & Lee, Keun, 2022. "Local–global interface as a key factor in the catching up of regional innovation systems: Fast versus slow catching up among Taipei, Shenzhen, and Penang in Asia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    7. Gandenberger, Carsten, 2018. "China's trajectory from production to innovation: Insights from the photovoltaics sector," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S03/2018, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    8. Gesa Pflitsch & Verena Radinger-Peer, 2018. "Developing Boundary-Spanning Capacity for Regional Sustainability Transitions—A Comparative Case Study of the Universities of Augsburg (Germany) and Linz (Austria)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Pradeep Racherla & Munir Mandviwalla, 2013. "Moving from Access to Use of the Information Infrastructure: A Multilevel Sociotechnical Framework," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 709-730, September.
    10. Giovanni Dosi & Andrea Roventini & Emmanuele Russo, 2020. "Public Policies And The Art Of Catching Up," Working Papers hal-03242369, HAL.
    11. Ajay Thutupalli & Michiko Iizuka, 2016. "Catching-up in agricultural innovation: the case of Bacillus thuringiensis cotton in India," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(6), pages 923-940.
    12. Ha-Joon Chang & Antonio Andreoni, 2021. "Bringing Production Back into Development: An introduction," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(2), pages 165-178, April.
    13. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Institutionalizing end-user demand steering in agricultural R&D: Farmer levy funding of R&D in The Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 460-472, April.
    14. Lavopa, Alejandro & Szirmai, Adam, 2018. "Structural modernisation and development traps. An empirical approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 59-73.
    15. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    16. Eleftheriadis, Iordanis M. & Anagnostopoulou, Evgenia G., 2015. "Identifying barriers in the diffusion of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 153-164.
    17. Catia Milena Lopes & Annibal José Scavarda & Mauricio Nunes Macedo de Carvalho & André Luis Korzenowski, 2018. "The Business Model and Innovation Analyses: The Sustainable Transition Obstacles and Drivers for the Hospital Supply Chains," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Marina van Geenhuizen, 2013. "From Ivory Tower to Living Lab: Accelerating the Use of University Knowledge," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(6), pages 1115-1132, December.
    19. Marletto, Gerardo, 2011. "Structure, agency and change in the car regime. A review of the literature," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 71-88.
    20. Vincent-Paul Sanon & Raymond Ouedraogo & Patrice Toé & Hamid El Bilali & Erwin Lautsch & Stefan Vogel & Andreas H. Melcher, 2021. "Socio-Economic Perspectives of Transition in Inland Fisheries and Fish Farming in a Least Developed Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-34, March.

    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:45:y:2018:i:1:p:36-44.. 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.