IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?


  • Roelofsen, Anneloes
  • Boon, Wouter P.C.
  • Kloet, Roy R.
  • Broerse, Jacqueline E.W.


One of the challenges for public-private R&D collaborations in emerging scientific fields is to actively include the demand side. Insight in how to facilitate learning between stakeholders is, however, lacking. In this paper we present an approach to facilitate and analyse learning processes in multi-stakeholder interactions within public-private research consortia working on new science and technologies. The learning processes that took place during dialogue meetings within the framework of the Dutch Ecogenomics Consortium were analysed, including a reflection on the actual effects. The results show that a carefully structured dialogue method facilitates learning between researchers, users and policy-related participants, and that this learning to some extent is anchored within the Ecogenomics Consortium. At the same time, the results point to the challenges of translating learning into action.

Suggested Citation

  • Roelofsen, Anneloes & Boon, Wouter P.C. & Kloet, Roy R. & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W., 2011. "Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:3:p:341-354

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Rip, Arie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 871-879, July.
    2. Lyall, Catherine & Bruce, Ann & Firn, John & Firn, Marion & Tait, Joyce, 2004. "Assessing end-use relevance of public sector research organisations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 73-87, January.
    3. Sue Mayer, 2003. "Science out of step with the public: The need for public accountability of science in the UK," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 177-181, June.
    4. Marleen Kerkhof, 2006. "Making a difference: On the constraints of consensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(3), pages 279-299, September.
    5. J Francisca Caron-Flinterman & Jacqueline E W Broerse & Julia Teerling & Melissa L Y van Alst & Simon Klaasen & L Edwin Swart & Joske F G Bunders, 2006. "Stakeholder participation in health research agenda setting: the case of asthma and COPD research in the Netherlands," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 291-304, May.
    6. repec:hal:journl:hal-00424519 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Shapira, Philip & Klein, Hans & Kuhlmann, Stefan, 2001. "Innovations in European and US innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 869-872, June.
    8. Hyysalo, Sampsa, 2009. "Learning for learning economy and social learning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 726-735, June.
    9. Corley, Elizabeth A. & Boardman, P. Craig & Bozeman, Barry, 2006. "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 975-993, September.
    10. Link, Albert N. & Paton, David & Siegel, Donald S., 2002. "An analysis of policy initiatives to promote strategic research partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1459-1466, December.
    11. Lundvall, Bengt-Ake & Johnson, Bjorn & Andersen, Esben Sloth & Dalum, Bent, 2002. "National systems of production, innovation and competence building," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-231, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. de Jong, Stefan P.L. & Wardenaar, Tjerk & Horlings, Edwin, 2016. "Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1397-1409.
    2. Omid Omidvar & Roman Kislov, 2016. "R&D Consortia As Boundary Organisations: Misalignment And Asymmetry Of Boundary Management," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Dentoni, Domenico & Klerkx, Laurens, 2015. "Co-managing public research in Australian fisheries through convergence–divergence processes," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 259-271.
    4. repec:enr:rpaper:0013 is not listed on IDEAS


    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:eee:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:3:p:341-354. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.