IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v127y2022i8d10.1007_s11192-022-04428-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scrutinizing the collaboration criterion in research: how do policy ambitions play out in proposals and assessments?

Author

Listed:
  • Oskar Jonsson

    (Lund University)

  • Susanne Iwarsson

    (Lund University)

Abstract

Based on a commission by one of the Swedish Research Council, which has high ambitions to strengthen the collaboration between academia and society, this study aimed to reveal how researchers describe the collaboration with partners outside the university in research proposals. Globally, collaboration is advocated to bridge research-practice gaps and address complex societal challenges. This study scrutinizes how the collaboration criterion was operationalized in all research proposals submitted to The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare in 2016. A content analysis of 381 proposals and related assessments was used to identify patterns and categories. Preliminary results were subjected to discussion in a workshop with 34 researchers representing granted proposals in the material, followed by further analysis. Comparisons were made between granted and rejected proposals. The applicants had made diverse interpretations of the collaboration criterion specified in the calls under which the proposals were submitted. The few that described theoretical underpinnings for collaborative approaches used a diversity of concepts but none of them frequently. Collaboration overlapped with other sections in the proposals. There is a need to develop theoretical awareness and conceptual clarity regarding collaboration and embed collaboration in research. In the context studied, collaboration with actors outside the university does not appear to be crucial for funding.

Suggested Citation

  • Oskar Jonsson & Susanne Iwarsson, 2022. "Scrutinizing the collaboration criterion in research: how do policy ambitions play out in proposals and assessments?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4675-4696, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04428-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04428-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04428-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-022-04428-0?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. Hessels, Laurens K. & van Lente, Harro, 2008. "Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 740-760, May.
    2. Catherine Durose & Liz Richardson & Beth Perry, 2018. "Craft metrics to value co-production," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7725), pages 32-33, October.
    3. Laurens K. Hessels & Harro van Lente, 2008. "Re-thinking knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-03, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    4. Dirk Czarnitzki & Andrew Toole, 2010. "Is there a trade-off between academic research and faculty entrepreneurship? Evidence from US NIH supported biomedical researchers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 505-520.
    5. 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.
    6. Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Smeby, Jens-Christian, 2005. "Industry funding and university professors' research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 932-950, August.
    7. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    8. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    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. Llopis, Oscar & D'Este, Pablo & McKelvey, Maureen & Yegros, Alfredo, 2022. "Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    2. Olmos Peñuela,Julia & Benneworth,Paul & Castro-Martínez,Elena, 2014. "Explaining researchersâ readiness to incorporate external stimuli in their research agendas," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201408, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV).
    3. Julia Olmos‐Peñuela & Paul Benneworth & Elena Castro‐Martínez, 2015. "Exploring the factors related with scientists’ willingness to incorporating external knowledge," CHEPS Working Papers 201504, University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).
    4. Niels Stijn & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Martine Veelen, 2018. "Exploring the motives and practices of university–start-up interaction: evidence from Route 128," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 674-713, June.
    5. Roman Fudickar & Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2018. "What’s the price of academic consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(4), pages 699-722.
    6. Michaela Trippl & Tanja Sinozic & Helen Lawton Smith, 2015. "The Role of Universities in Regional Development: Conceptual Models and Policy Institutions in the UK, Sweden and Austria," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1722-1740, September.
    7. Fudickar, Roman & Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2016. "What’s the price of consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201602, University of Turin.
    8. Analena B. Bruce & Yetkin Borlu & Leland L. Glenna, 2023. "Assessing the scientific support for U.S. EPA pesticide regulatory policy governing active and inert ingredients," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, March.
    9. Rossi, Federica & Rosli, Ainurul & Yip, Nick, 2017. "Academic engagement as knowledge co-production and implications for impact: Evidence from Knowledge Transfer Partnerships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-9.
    10. Sengupta, Abhijit & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "The relationship between universities' funding portfolios and their knowledge exchange profiles: A dynamic capabilities view," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    11. Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Castro-Martínez, Elena & D’Este, Pablo, 2014. "Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 696-706.
    12. A. E. Rodríguez Salazar & M. A. Domínguez-Crespo & A. M. Torres-Huerta & A. I. Licona-Aguilar & A. Nivón-Pellón & V. N. Orta-Guzmán, 2021. "Analysis of the Dynamical Capabilities into the Public Research Institutes to Their Strategic Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    14. Frank Rijnsoever & Leon Welle & Sjoerd Bakker, 2014. "Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 635-661, August.
    15. Lauretta Rubini & Chiara Pollio & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & Elisa Barbieri, 2021. "Heterogeneous effects of spinoff foundations on the means of technology transfer: the role of past academic-industry collaborations," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 38(1), pages 261-292, April.
    16. D’Este, Pablo & Robinson-García, Nicolás, 2023. "Interdisciplinary research and the societal visibility of science: The advantages of spanning multiple and distant scientific fields," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    17. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    18. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    19. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    20. Froese, Anna & Woiwode, Hendrik & Suckow, Silvio, 2019. "Mission Impossible? Neue Wege zu Interdisziplinarität: Empfehlungen für Wissenschaft, Wissenschaftspolitik und Praxis," Discussion Papers, Research Group Science Policy Studies SP III 2019-601, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    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:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04428-0. 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.