IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/cesisp/0441.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Knowledge transfer at the science-policy interface: How cognitive distance and the degree of expert autonomy shapes the outcome

Author

Listed:
  • Broström, Anders

    (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology)

  • McKelvey, Maureen

    (Institute of Innovation & Entrepreneurship, Department of Economy & Society, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg.)

Abstract

This paper analyzes the conditions for successful knowledge transfer between the spheres of science and public policy. It does so by focusing upon the science-policy interface, specifically the processes of direct interaction between scientists and scientifically trained experts on the one hand and agents of policy-making organizations on the other. The paper defines two dimensions – cognitive distance and expert autonomy – which are argued to influence knowledge exchange, in such a way as to shape the outcome. A case study on the implementation of congestion charges in Stockholm, Sweden illustrates how the proposed framework pinpoints three central issues for understanding these processes: 1) differentiating the roles of e.g. a science-based consultancy firm and an academic environment in policy formation; 2) examining the fit between the organizational form of the science-policy interface and the intended goals; and 3) increasing our understanding of when policy makers themselves need to develop scientific competence in order to interact effectively with scientific experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Broström, Anders & McKelvey, Maureen, 2016. "Knowledge transfer at the science-policy interface: How cognitive distance and the degree of expert autonomy shapes the outcome," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 441, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://static.sys.kth.se/itm/wp/cesis/cesiswp441.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Hugosson, Muriel & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2012. "The Stockholm congestion charges – five years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:3, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Martin Lundin & PerOla Öberg, 2014. "Expert knowledge use and deliberation in local policy making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(1), pages 25-49, March.
    4. Gerry Stoker & Peter John, 2009. "Design Experiments: Engaging Policy Makers in the Search for Evidence about What Works," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(2), pages 356-373, June.
    5. Eliasson, Jonas & Hultkrantz, Lars & Nerhagen, Lena & Rosqvist, Lena Smidfelt, 2009. "The Stockholm congestion - charging trial 2006: Overview of effects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 240-250, March.
    6. Graham Leicester, 1999. "Viewpoint: The Seven Enemies of Evidence-Based Policy," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 5-7, January.
    7. Daunfeldt, Sven-Olov & Rudholm, Niklas & Rämme, Ulf, 2009. "Congestion charges and retail revenues: Results from the Stockholm road pricing trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 306-309, March.
    8. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Hugosson, Muriel B. & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2012. "The Stockholm congestion charges—5 years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2011. "Research institutes as hybrid organizations: central challenges to their legitimacy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(3), pages 215-230, September.
    10. F. H. Knight, 1924. "Some Fallacies in the Interpretation of Social Cost," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 38(4), pages 582-606.
    11. Gerry Stoker & Peter John, 2009. "Design Experiments: Engaging Policy Makers in the Search for Evidence about What Works," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 356-373, June.
    12. Bercovitz, Janet & Feldman, Maryann, 2011. "The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 81-93, February.
    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. Eliasson, Jonas, 2017. "Congestion pricing," MPRA Paper 88224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Andersson, David & Nässén, Jonas, 2016. "The Gothenburg congestion charge scheme: A pre–post analysis of commuting behavior and travel satisfaction," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 82-89.
    3. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    4. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    5. De Vos, Jonas, 2016. "Road pricing in a polycentric urban region: Analysing a pilot project in Belgium," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 134-142.
    6. Nicholas Janusch & Stephan Kroll & Christopher Goemans & Todd L. Cherry & Steffen Kallbekken, 2021. "Learning to accept welfare-enhancing policies: an experimental investigation of congestion pricing," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 59-86, March.
    7. Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "The role of attitude structures, direct experience and reframing for the success of congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 81-95.
    8. Ding, Hongliang & Sze, N.N. & Li, Haojie & Guo, Yanyong, 2021. "Affected area and residual period of London Congestion Charging scheme on road safety," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 120-128.
    9. Farokhi, Farhad & Johansson, Karl H., 2015. "A piecewise-constant congestion taxing policy for repeated routing games," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 123-143.
    10. Coria, Jessica & Bonilla, Jorge & Grundström, Maria & Pleijel, Håkan, 2015. "Air pollution dynamics and the need for temporally differentiated road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 178-195.
    11. Gibson, Matthew & Carnovale, Maria, 2015. "The effects of road pricing on driver behavior and air pollution," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 62-73.
    12. Kristoffersson, Ida & Engelson, Leonid, 2016. "Efficiency and equity of congestion charges," Working papers in Transport Economics 2016:7, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    13. Morton, Craig & Mattioli, Giulio & Anable, Jillian, 2021. "Public acceptability towards Low Emission Zones: The role of attitudes, norms, emotions, and trust," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 256-270.
    14. Eliasson, Jonas & Börjesson, Maria & van Amelsfort, Dirk & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Engelson, Leonid, 2013. "Accuracy of congestion pricing forecasts," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 34-46.
    15. Marazi, Naveed Farooz & Majumdar, Bandhan Bandhu & Sahu, Prasanta K. & Potoglou, Dimitris, 2022. "Congestion pricing acceptability among commuters: An Indian perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    16. Ida Kristoffersson & Leonid Engelson, 2018. "Estimating preferred departure times of road users in a large urban network," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 767-787, May.
    17. Börjesson, Maria & Kristoffersson, Ida, 2018. "The Swedish congestion charges: Ten years on," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 35-51.
    18. Koh, Wee Ping & Chin, Kian Keong, 2022. "The applicability of prospect theory in examining drivers’ trip decisions, in response to Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) rates adjustments - a study using travel data in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 115-127.
    19. De Borger, Bruno & Glazer, Amihai, 2017. "Support and opposition to a Pigovian tax: Road pricing with reference-dependent preferences," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 31-47.
    20. Juan Pedro Muñoz Miguel & Ana Elizabeth García Sipols & Clara Simón de Blas & Francisca Anguita Rodríguez, 2021. "A Model to Evaluate the Effect of Urban Road Pricing on Traffic Speed and Congestion in Madrid City Center and Its Surrounding," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-23, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    organizational learning; science-based policy; evidence-based policy; interaction; cognitive distance; congestion charges;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:cesisp:0441. 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: Vardan Hovsepyan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cekthse.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.