IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v28y2019i1p2-6..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Les indicateurs sont morts, vive les indicateurs! Towards a political economy of S&T indicators: A critical overview of the past 35 years

Author

Listed:
  • Rémi Barré

Abstract

Science and Technology (S&T) indicators are contingent knowledge demanding critique and contextualization for validity: they are value-laden devices. Hence their potential for generating biased knowledge, exhibiting the attributes of devices enabling the social construction of bias and ignorance. But indicators are also prone to criticism and debate, thus, potentially, powerful devices for robust knowledge production. The 80s mark the rise of the new field of S&T indicators aiming at better debates and policies, at the inclusion of science in democracy. Since the mid-90s, there is an extraordinary expansion of S&T indicators field. But the situation today is one of collective blindness through the acceleration of unquestioned S&T activities. To make sense of this situation we contend that (1) S&T indicators have largely become ignorance producing devices, that (2) dominant forces have driven the present design and use of indicators, and that (3) the S&T indicators scientific community, conscious of the drift, has distanced itself since the mid-90s while keeping scientifically active. If the three propositions are correct, then the collective responsibility of the S&T indicators scientific community is to call for an ending of the culturally produced ignorance drift and to pave the way for new designs and uses based on its founding ‘science in democracy’ problematique.

Suggested Citation

  • Rémi Barré, 2019. "Les indicateurs sont morts, vive les indicateurs! Towards a political economy of S&T indicators: A critical overview of the past 35 years," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 2-6.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:28:y:2019:i:1:p:2-6.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvy029
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shuto Miyashita & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Scientometrics for management of science: collaboration and knowledge structures and complexities in an interdisciplinary research project," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7419-7444, September.
    2. Arlette Jappe, 2020. "Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-23, April.

    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:28:y:2019:i:1:p:2-6.. 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.