IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v21y2012i4p306-318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making

Author

Listed:
  • Abdullah Gök
  • Jakob Edler

Abstract

The key object of innovation policy is to change behaviour of actors in order to improve innovation capabilities and outcomes. The overarching aim of this article is to improve our understanding of how this behavioural additionality (BA) can be better conceptualized and put into practice in evaluation and policy making. The article first outlines the theoretical framework of the concept of BA. On that basis it looks in detail at the way BA is currently operationalized in evaluation practice and how the concept is applied in the interaction between policy makers and evaluators. The article utilizes a statistical analysis of 171 innovation policy evaluations, a text analysis of selected BA evaluation reports, and finally a number of in-depth case studies of evaluations. Based on the conceptualization and the empirical findings, the article identifies three different uses of BA in innovation policy evaluations. The article further concludes that despite the widespread use of the concept of BA, an improved theoretical basis and serious methodological improvements are needed to realize the full potential of the concept for evaluation and policy practice. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdullah Gök & Jakob Edler, 2012. "The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 306-318, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:21:y:2012:i:4:p:306-318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvs015
    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.

    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:rseval:v:21:y:2012:i:4:p:306-318. 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/rev .

    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.