IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/lucirc/2022_010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating Transformation – what can we learn from the literature?

Author

Listed:
  • Wise, Emily

    (CIRCLE, Lund University)

  • Arnold, Erik

    (University of Manchester)

Abstract

The last decade’s rise of the so-called “third frame” (or third generation) of Transformative Innovation Policies (TIP) has shifted focus of research and innovation investments from economic growth and competitiveness to also tackling societal challenges and generating broader environmental and societal impact. The evolution in rationale and aims for policy action also implies a need to adapt and evolve evaluative strategies and practices. As policymakers begin to develop new transformative innovation programmes, a key question arises as to how monitoring, evaluation and learning practices (currently framed around 1st and 2nd generation innovation policies) can be adapted in order to meet 3rd generation innovation policy needs? In shaping a response, one can learn from both theory and practice. This brief (produced within the GReaTr initiative ) aims to provide a synthesis of what recent academic research tells us about evaluating transformation, leveraging a set of 11 seminal articles (and other complementary literature) to answer four questions: For whom and why? What to evaluate? How to evaluate? What unit of analysis? The synthesis points to a relative consensus in the academic literature on the main purposes and uses, the recommended principles and approaches, as well as possibilities for delineating and dealing with multiple scopes and units of analysis in evaluating transformation – yet highlights different conceptual framings of system change. The summary provides inputs to planning an evaluative strategy for TIP and highlights the need to consider new questions related to approaches to reporting across funding agencies, and more active roles for funding and policymaking agencies in dialogues about strategic direction and prioritisation of investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Wise, Emily & Arnold, Erik, 2022. "Evaluating Transformation – what can we learn from the literature?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/10, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:lucirc:2022_010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.circle.lu.se/upload/CIRCLE/workingpapers/202210_wise.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harro van Lente & Marko Hekkert & Ruud Smits & Bas van Waveren, 2003. "Roles of Systemic Intermediaries in Transition Processes," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(03), pages 247-279.
    2. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    3. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    4. Erik Arnold, 2004. "Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 3-17, April.
    5. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    6. Matthijs J Janssen & Anna Bergek & Joeri H Wesseling, 2022. "Evaluating systemic innovation and transition programmes: Towards a culture of learning," PLOS Sustainability and Transformation, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(3), pages 1-6, March.
    7. Geels, Frank W., 2014. "Reconceptualising the co-evolution of firms-in-industries and their environments: Developing an inter-disciplinary Triple Embeddedness Framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 261-277.
    8. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Schoen, Antoine & Larédo, Philippe & Gallart, Jordi Molas & Warnke, Philine & Kuhlmann, Stefan & Ordóñez-Matamoros, Gonzalo, 2021. "Policy lensing of future-oriented strategic intelligence: An experiment connecting foresight with decision making contexts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2013. "Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1647-1656.
    10. Jakob Edler & Bernd Ebersberger & Vivien Lo, 2008. "Improving policy understanding by means of secondary analyses of policy evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 175-186, September.
    11. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Antoine Schoen & Philippe Larédo & Jordi Molas Gallart & Philine Warnke & Stefan Kuhlmann & Gonzalo Ordóñez-Matamoros, 2021. "Policy lensing of future-oriented strategic intelligence: An experiment connecting foresight with decision making contexts," Post-Print hal-03232913, HAL.
    12. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    13. Hyysalo, Sampsa & Juntunen, Jouni K. & Martiskainen, Mari, 2018. "Energy Internet forums as acceleration phase transition intermediaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 872-885.
    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. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    3. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    4. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    5. María Elena López Reyes & Willem A. Zwagers & Ingrid J. Mulder, 2020. "Considering the Human-Dimension to Make Sustainable Transitions Actionable," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    6. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    7. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    8. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    9. Judson, E. & Fitch-Roy, O. & Pownall, T. & Bray, R. & Poulter, H. & Soutar, I. & Lowes, R. & Connor, P.M. & Britton, J. & Woodman, B. & Mitchell, C., 2020. "The centre cannot (always) hold: Examining pathways towards energy system de-centralisation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    11. Nikas, A. & Koasidis, K. & Köberle, A.C. & Kourtesi, G. & Doukas, H., 2022. "A comparative study of biodiesel in Brazil and Argentina: An integrated systems of innovation perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    12. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    13. Matthijs Janssen, 2016. "What bangs for your bucks? Assessing the design and impact of transformative policy," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 16-05, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Dec 2016.
    14. Nhat Strøm-Andersen, 2019. "Incumbents in the Transition Towards the Bioeconomy: The Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Innovation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    15. Steen, Markus & Weaver, Tyson, 2017. "Incumbents’ diversification and cross-sectorial energy industry dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1071-1086.
    16. Wesseling, J.H. & Lechtenböhmer, S. & Åhman, M. & Nilsson, L.J. & Worrell, E. & Coenen, L., 2017. "The transition of energy intensive processing industries towards deep decarbonization: Characteristics and implications for future research," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1303-1313.
    17. Janssen, Matthijs J., 2019. "What bangs for your buck? Assessing the design and impact of Dutch transformative policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 78-94.
    18. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    19. Hirt, Léon F. & Sahakian, Marlyne & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2022. "What subnational imaginaries for solar PV? The case of the Swiss energy transition," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    20. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation policy; Evaluation; System evaluation; Transformation; Socio-technical transitions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:lucirc:2022_010. 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: Torben Schubert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/circlse.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.