IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gbl/wpaper/2015-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A typology of impact pathways generated by a public agricultural research organization

Author

Listed:
  • Matt, M.
  • Colinet, L.
  • Gaunand, A.
  • Joly, P.B.

Abstract

This paper builds a typology of impact pathways generated by an agricultural public research organization, namely INRA (National Institute for Agronomic Research). The typology is built by codifying 32 standardized case studies providing rich qualitative information about the impact pathway and a quantitative assessment of a vector of impacts. We identify five classes of typical impact pathways characterized by specific mechanisms related to the positioning and role of actors in various networks of translation. One Class is characterized by long-term partnerships, generating high impacts. INRA coordinates complex research projects and structures the diffusion process to facilitate market access. In a second Class INRA conducts long term risky collaborative projects thanks to accumulated knowledge and infrastructures. Impacts are high. Market for technologies cases are pooled in Class 3 and correspond to classical IP commercialization. Impacts are lower. Cases in Class 4 are technological options allowing new possible uses that encounter diffusion obstacles. Class 5 encompasses all cases with political impacts as main dimension.

Suggested Citation

  • Matt, M. & Colinet, L. & Gaunand, A. & Joly, P.B., 2015. "A typology of impact pathways generated by a public agricultural research organization," Working Papers 2015-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    • Handle: RePEc:gbl:wpaper:2015-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://gael.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/sites/gael/files/doc-recherche/WP/A2015/gael2015-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Claire Donovan & Stephen Hanney, 2011. "The ‘Payback Framework’ explained," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 181-183, September.
    3. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    4. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    5. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    6. Mangematin, V. & Callon, M., 1995. "Technological competition, strategies of the firms and the choice of the first users: the case of road guidance technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 441-458, May.
    7. Douthwaite, Boru & Kuby, Thomas & van de Fliert, Elske & Schulz, Steffen, 2003. "Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 243-265, November.
    8. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    9. Vincent Mangematin & Michel Callon, 1995. "Technological competition, strategies of the firms and the choice of the first users: the case of road guidance technologies," Post-Print hal-00422545, HAL.
    10. Stefan de Jong & Katharine Barker & Deborah Cox & Thordis Sveinsdottir & Peter Van den Besselaar, 2014. "Understanding societal impact through productive interactions: ICT research as a case," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 89-102.
    11. Nedeva, Maria, 2013. "Between the global and the national: Organising European science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 220-230.
    12. Green, Ken & Hull, Richard & McMeekin, Andrew & Walsh, Vivien, 1999. "The construction of the techno-economic: networks vs. paradigms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 777-792, September.
    13. Pearce, David & Monck, Michael & Chadwick, Kevin & Corbishley, James, 2006. "Benefits to Australia from ACIAR-funded Research," Impact Assessment Series (IAS) 113213, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.
    14. Claire Donovan, 2007. "The qualitative future of research evaluation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 585-597, October.
    15. Gaunand, A. & Hocdé, A. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M. & Turckheim, E.de, 2015. "How does public agricultural research impact society? A characterization of various patterns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 849-861.
    16. Kingsley, Gordon & Bozeman, Barrt & Coker, Karen, 1996. "Technology transfer and absorption: an 'R & D value-mapping' approach to evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 967-995, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 260-276, June.
    19. Claire Donovan, 2011. "State of the art in assessing research impact: introduction to a special issue," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 175-179, September.
    20. P.-B. Joly & Vincent Mangematin, 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Post-Print hal-00422575, HAL.
    21. Renkow, Mitch & Byerlee, Derek, 2010. "The impacts of CGIAR research: A review of recent evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 391-402, October.
    22. Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright & Andy Lockett, 2007. "The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 489-504, August.
    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. Matt, M. & Gaunand, A. & Joly, P-B. & Colinet, L., 2017. "Opening the black box of impact – Ideal-type impact pathways in a public agricultural research organization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 207-218.
    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. Gaunand, A. & Hocdé, A. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M. & Turckheim, E.de, 2015. "How does public agricultural research impact society? A characterization of various patterns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 849-861.
    4. Kroll, Henning & Hansmeier, Hendrik & Hufnagl, Miriam, 2022. "Productive interactions in basic research an enquiry into impact pathways at the DESY synchrotron," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Pierre Benoit Joly & Laurence Colinet & Ariane Gaunand & Stephane Lemarié & Mireille Matt, 2016. "Agricultural research impact assessment: issues, methods and challenges," Working Papers hal-01431457, HAL.
    6. Dotti, Nicola Francesco & Walczyk, Julia, 2022. "What is the societal impact of university research? A policy-oriented review to map approaches, identify monitoring methods and success factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    7. Theoharakis, Vasilis & Vakratsas, Demetrios & Wong, Veronica, 2007. "Market-level information and the diffusion of competing technologies: An exploratory analysis of the LAN industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 742-757, June.
    8. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    9. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Daniele Biancardi & Mabel Sanchez Barrioluengo & Federico Biagi, 2019. "Study on Higher Education Institutions and Local Development," JRC Research Reports JRC117272, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Peter Weißhuhn & Katharina Helming & Johanna Ferretti, 2018. "Research impact assessment in agriculture—A review of approaches and impact areas," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 36-42.
    11. Guesmi, B. & Gil, J.M., 2018. "Monitoring and Evaluation of Public Agricultural Research Organization: Impact oriented monitoring approach," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277554, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Lisa Blix Germundsson & Sören Augustinsson & Alina Lidén, 2020. "Collaboration in the Making—Towards a Practice-Based Approach to University Innovation Intermediary Organisations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Alessandro Magrini & Fabio Bartolini & Alessandra Coli & Barbara Pacini, 2019. "A structural equation model to assess the impact of agricultural research expenditure on multiple dimensions," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 2063-2080, July.
    14. Callaert, Julie & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart & Verganti, Roberto, 2015. "Scientific yield from collaboration with industry: The relevance of researchers’ strategic approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 990-998.
    15. Lin Zhang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Huiying Du & Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8861-8886, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Chicot, J. & Matt, M., 2015. "Public procurement of innovation: a review of rationales, instruments and design," Working Papers 2015-05, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    18. Bianchini, Stefano & Llerena, Patrick & Patsali, Sofia, 2019. "Demand-pull innovation in science: Empirical evidence from a research university’s suppliers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(S).
    19. Bozeman, Barry & Rogers, Juan D., 2002. "A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 769-794, July.
    20. Zhang, Lin & Sivertsen, Gunnar & Du, Huiying & HUANG, Ying & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," SocArXiv 9n347, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH; SOCIETAL IMPACT; IMPACT PATHWAY; EVALUATION; INRA;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • C39 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Other

    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:gbl:wpaper:2015-03. 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: Adrien Hervouet (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inragfr.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.