This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Thematic research prioritization in the EU and the Netherlands: an assessment on the basis of content analysis

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Hemert, P. van (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics)
Nijkamp, P.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

With the upsurge of the knowledge economy, a balanced and professional setting of science and technology research priorities is becoming increasingly important. Priority setting in general - and in the European Union Framework Programmes (FP) in particular - has often been criticized by many academics, who tend to describe them as ‘Loch Ness monsters of bureaucracy’: new granting rules and funding terminologies tend to appear almost every five years; the procedures involved in granting awards are often considered as impregnable and unclear; and the decision-making process is sometimes rather different from classical, quality- controlled peer-review systems. In practice, researchers often prefer small-scale transparant national research programmes over the European FPs, provided they are based on quality criteria. This paper aims to provide: (i) a critical overview of mechanisms for establishing priorities in research programmes (or themes); and (ii) an assessment approach to the current practices of setting research priorities in the EU and the Netherlands in particular, by means of counting procedures based on statistical content analysis. Our investigation of the EU and Dutch national theme priority-setting experiences shows that the two mechanisms are largely complementary and, as such, can prove an important stimulus for further excellence, collaboration and connectivity in the complex world of science policy.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: ftp://zappa.ubvu.vu.nl/20080023.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics in its series Serie Research Memoranda with number 0023.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dgr:vuarem:2008-23

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.feweb.vu.nl

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (R. Dam).

Related research
Keywords: knowledge economy; triple helix; priority setting; content analysis;

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Mowery, David C. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2002. "Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 399-418, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. van der Meulen, Barend & Rip, Arie, 1998. "Mediation in the Dutch science system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 757-769, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Faulkner, Wendy & Senker, Jacqueline, 1994. "Making sense of diversity: public-private sector research linkage in three technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 673-695, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Sveikauskas, Leo, 1981. "Technological Inputs and Multifactor Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(2), pages 275-82, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Callon, M. & Laredo, P. & Rabeharisoa, V. & Gonard, T. & Leray, T., 1992. "The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economic networks: The case of the AFME," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 215-236, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Maskell, Peter & Malmberg, Anders, 1999. "Localised Learning and Industrial Competitiveness," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 167-85, March.
    Other versions:
  10. Beesley, Lisa G. A., 2003. "Science policy in changing times: are governments poised to take full advantage of an institution in transition?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1519-1531, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Stewart, Jenny, 1995. "Models of priority-setting for public sector research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 115-126, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Kevin Morgan, 2002. "The New Regeneration Narrative - Local Development in the Multi-Level Polity," Local Economy, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 191-199, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages S71-102, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-9.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.