IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v47y2022i3d10.1007_s10961-017-9607-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation and monitoring of transdisciplinary collaborations

Author

Listed:
  • Leonie Drooge

    (Rathenau Institute)

  • Jack Spaapen

    (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences)

Abstract

In this paper we focus on the governance, in particular evaluation and monitoring, of the growing number of transdisciplinary collaborations (TDC’s). Researchers and a variety of stakeholders collaborate in such TDC’s, the purpose of which is to address societal challenges, like renewable energy, healthy aging or better language teaching in schools. Commonly used practices for evaluation of scientific research (accountability, rankings and benchmarking, dedicated to scientific excellence) do not fit the goals of TDC’s. A bottom up or stakeholder oriented approach is better suited; one that stimulates mutual learning as well as the development of socially robust knowledge. We introduce the participatory impact pathways analysis (PIPA), as a method that suits the requirements. It has been developed in the context of development research. Two crucial features are the involvement of stakeholders from the start, and the joint development of a theory of change. This narrates what one wants to achieve and how that will be achieved. From this, stakeholders construct a logical frame that serves as a source for indicators. These indicators enable monitoring ex durante, during the TDC. We present evidence of the use of PIPA for a TDC. From this empirical evidence a number of issues with regard to evaluation, monitoring and indicators can be identified that require attention. Most prominent is the change of function of indicators. Instead of looking back and a focus on past performance, indicators look forward, in the short, intermediate and more distant future.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonie Drooge & Jack Spaapen, 2022. "Evaluation and monitoring of transdisciplinary collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 747-761, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9607-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9607-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-017-9607-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-017-9607-7?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. Patricia Rogers, 2014. "Theory of Change: Methodological Briefs - Impact Evaluation No. 2," Papers innpub747, Methodological Briefs.
    2. Joly, P.B. & Gaunand, A. & Colinet, L. & Larédo, P. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M., 2015. "ASIRPA: a comprehensive theory-based approach to assessing the societal impacts of a research organization," Working Papers 2015-04, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    3. Jakob Edler & Stefan Kuhlmann, 2008. "Coordination within fragmentation: Governance in knowledge policy in the German federal system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 265-276, May.
    4. Stefan P. L. de Jong & Jorrit Smit & Leonie van Drooge, 2016. "Scientists’ response to societal impact policies: A policy paradox," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 102-114.
    5. Douthwaite, Boru & Schulz, Steffen & Olanrewaju, Adetunji S. & Ellis-Jones, Jim, 2007. "Impact pathway evaluation of an integrated Striga hermonthica control project in Northern Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-3), pages 201-222, January.
    6. Laurens K Hessels & Harro van Lente & Ruud Smits, 2009. "In search of relevance: The changing contract between science and society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 387-401, June.
    7. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    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. Rosa Kuipers-Dirven & Matthijs Janssen & Jarno Hoekman, 2023. "Assessing university policies for enhancing societal impact of academic research: A multicriteria mapping approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 371-383.
    2. Maru, Yiheyis Taddele & Sparrow, Ashley & Butler, James R.A. & Banerjee, Onil & Ison, Ray & Hall, Andy & Carberry, Peter, 2018. "Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 344-353.
    3. Jorrit P Smit & Laurens K Hessels, 2021. "The production of scientific and societal value in research evaluation: a review of societal impact assessment methods [Systems Thinking, Knowledge and Action: Towards Better Models and Methods]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 323-335.
    4. Genowefa Blundo-Canto & Bernard Triomphe & Guy Faure & Danielle Barret & Aurelle de Romemont & Etienne Hainzelin, 2019. "Building a culture of impact in an international agricultural research organization: Process and reflective learning," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 136-144.
    5. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    6. Ziad Rotaba & Catherine Beaudry, 2012. "How Do High, Medium, And Low Tech Firms Innovate? A System Of Innovation (Si) Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(05), pages 1-23.
    7. Lex Borghans & Bas ter Weel, 2011. "Computers, skills and wages," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(29), pages 4607-4622.
    8. Cimoli, Mario & Primi, Annalisa & Rovira, Sebastián, 2011. "National innovation surveys in latin America: empirical evidence and policy implications," Documentos de Proyectos 3897, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Grande, Rafael & Muñoz de Bustillo, Rafael & Fernández Macías, Enrique & Antón, José Ignacio, 2020. "Innovation and job quality. A firm-level exploration," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 130-142.
    10. Petersen, Alexander M. & Rotolo, Daniele & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2016. "A triple helix model of medical innovation: Supply, demand, and technological capabilities in terms of Medical Subject Headings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 666-681.
    11. Tavassoli, Sam, 2015. "Innovation determinants over industry life cycle," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 18-32.
    12. José Monteiro-Barata, 2005. "Innovation in the Portuguese Manufacturing Industry: Analysis of a Longitudinal Company Panel," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 301-314, August.
    13. Ponomariov, Branco & Toivanen, Hannes, 2014. "Knowledge flows and bases in emerging economy innovation systems: Brazilian research 2005–2009," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 588-596.
    14. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    15. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    16. Brunet, Lucas & Tuomisaari, Johanna & Lavorel, Sandra & Crouzat, Emilie & Bierry, Adeline & Peltola, Taru & Arpin, Isabelle, 2018. "Actionable knowledge for land use planning: Making ecosystem services operational," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 27-34.
    17. Fu, Xiaolan, 2012. "How does openness affect the importance of incentives for innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 512-523.
    18. Jacek Wysocki, 2021. "Innovative Green Initiatives in the Manufacturing SME Sector in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    19. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    20. repec:kap:iaecre:v:11:y:2005:i:3:p:301-314 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Hien Tran & Enrico Santarelli & Enrico Zaninotto, 2015. "Efficiency or bounded rationality? Drivers of firm diversification strategies in Vietnam," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 983-1010, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Transdisciplinary collaboration; Evaluation; Research governance; Monitoring; Stakeholders; Theory of change; PIPA;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9607-7. 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.