IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/35mec_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How do science and technology help to address societal problems? A practical typology of contributions

Author

Listed:
  • Nelson, John

Abstract

Governments, corporations, and nonprofits worldwide spend hundreds of billions of dollars each year on research and development intended to help address societal problems such as wealth inequity, public health, and climate change. But not all kinds of research are equally suited to help address each problem, and much research is not scoped or oriented to achieve needed contributions. Research strategy could benefit from a more granular and detailed understanding of the different contributions that research and development can make to the address of societal problems; of when each type of contribution is needed; and of how to identify research projects with the potential to achieve each contribution. I outline three different scientific activities—problem description and attribution, option assessment and evaluation, and option identification and development—and the different contributions they can make to societal problems exhibiting value consensus and value dissensus. I also provide two “catechisms” intended to help identify when each contribution is needed and what kinds of research are most likely to achieve each. I deploy this framework to the problem of “scientific choice,” to which it is intended to contribute, and suggest fruitful lines of research on societal allocation of scientific and innovative effort.

Suggested Citation

  • Nelson, John, 2025. "How do science and technology help to address societal problems? A practical typology of contributions," SocArXiv 35mec_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:35mec_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/35mec_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6839edcdb7499475f4d6a452/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/35mec_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    2. Power, Michael, 2018. "Creativity, risk and the research impact agenda in the United Kingdom," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87731, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Albert N Link & Christopher A Swann & Martijn van Hasselt, 2022. "An assessment of the US Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program: A study of project failure [On the Failure of Scientific Research: An Analysis of SBIR Projects Funded by the U.S. Nationa," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 972-978.
    4. Barry Bozeman, 2019. "Public values: citizens’ perspective," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(6), pages 817-838, June.
    5. Perkmann, Markus & Salandra, Rossella & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Hughes, Alan, 2021. "Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    6. Daniel Sarewitz, 2011. "Does climate change knowledge really matter?," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(4), pages 475-481, July.
    7. Power, Michael, 2018. "Creativity, Risk and the Research Impact Agenda in the United Kingdom," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(S1), pages 25-34, February.
    8. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    9. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    10. Ben R Martin, 2011. "The Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact agenda’: are we creating a Frankenstein monster?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 247-254, September.
    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. Rosa Kuipers-Dirven & Matthijs Janssen & Jarno Hoekman, 2023. "Assessing university policies for enhancing societal impact of academic research: A multicriteria mapping approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 371-383.
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Adrian Rauchfleisch & Mike S Schäfer & Dario Siegen, 2021. "Beyond the ivory tower: Measuring and explaining academic engagement with journalists, politicians and industry representatives among Swiss professors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Nast, Carolin & Llopis, Oscar & Yankova, Dima & D'Este, Pablo, 2025. "Sourcing insights elsewhere: The positive influence of academic engagement on scientific impact," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. Yuya Kajikawa, 2022. "Reframing evidence in evidence-based policy making and role of bibliometrics: toward transdisciplinary scientometric research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5571-5585, September.
    6. David Barberá-Tomás & Joaquín M. Azagra-Caro & Pablo D’Este, 2022. "Dynamic perspectives on technology transfer: introduction to the special section," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1299-1307, October.
    7. Ohid Yaqub & Dmitry Malkov & Josh Siepel, 2023. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 273-285.
    8. Frank J. Rijnsoever & Laurens K. Hessels, 2021. "How academic researchers select collaborative research projects: a choice experiment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1917-1948, December.
    9. Thomas, Duncan Andrew & Ramos-Vielba, Irene, 2022. "Reframing study of research(er) funding towards configurations and trails," SocArXiv uty2v, Center for Open Science.
    10. John P. Nelson & Barry Bozeman & Stuart Bretschneider & Spencer L. Lindsay, 2024. "How do academic public administration and public policy researchers affect policymaking? Functional groupings from survey data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 65-93, January.
    11. Suominen, Arho & Kauppinen, Henni & Hyytinen, Kirsi, 2021. "‘Gold’, ‘Ribbon’ or ‘Puzzle’: What motivates researchers to work in Research and Technology Organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:371-383. is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Kwadwo Atta-Owusu & Rune Dahl Fitjar, 2022. "What motivates academics for external engagement? Exploring the effects of motivational drivers and organizational fairness [The Nature of Academic Entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the Focus on," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 201-218.
    14. Grisard, Claudine, 2023. "Time, workload model and the entrepreneurial construction of the neoliberal academic," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    16. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    17. Michaela Strinzel & Josh Brown & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Sarah Rijcke & Michael Hill, 2021. "Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.
    18. Jonathan P. Doh & Lorraine Eden & Anne S. Tsui & Srilata Zaheer, 2023. "Developing international business scholarship for global societal impact," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(5), pages 757-767, July.
    19. Eugenio Verrina, 2023. "Upset but (almost) correct: a conceptual replication of Di Tella, Perez-Truglia, Babino and Sigman (2015)," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 327-336, December.
    20. repec:plo:pone00:0235265 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Dima Jamali & Georges Samara & Lokman I. Meho, 2024. "Determinants of research productivity and efficiency among the Arab world’s accredited business schools," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2511-2543, December.
    22. Casey A. Klofstad & Joseph E. Uscinski & Jennifer M. Connolly & Jonathan P. West, 2019. "What drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    23. Michel, Hanno, 2020. "From local to global: The role of knowledge, transfer, and capacity building for successful energy transitions," Discussion Papers, Research Group Digital Mobility and Social Differentiation SP III 2020-603, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    More about this item

    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:osf:socarx:35mec_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.