Unintended consequences of innovation policy programmes: Social evaluation of the technological projects programme in Croatia
Jadranka Švarc
Institute of Social Sciences Ivo Pilar, Zagreb, Croatia
Jasminka Lažnjak
Department of Sociology, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Juraj Perković
Institute of Social Sciences Ivo Pilar, Zagreb, Croatia
PP: 077 - 094
Abstract
The paper presents empirical results of social evaluation of the first innovation policy programme, technology projects (TEST), in Croatia to identify and explain the main bottlenecks of the programme and put them in perspective in terms of the entire innovation system. The motivation is the growing criticism of innovation system's efficiency and perception of poor return on public investment in innovation policy programmes.
The proposed method of social evaluation is based on combination of the institutional theory and the sociological approach of intended and unintended consequences. It reveals that expected outcomes of the programme such as commercialisation of research and technological outputs are exchanged, in the majority of projects, for essentially scientific results such as scientific publications and extension of the on-going scientific projects.
The reasons are found in the institutional deficits that point to the persistence of some common 'systemic' problems in the innovation system. Their drivers are identified in three types of institutional deficits: administrative rules and procedures, some aspects of social capital and broader socio-economic environment that commonly determine behaviour and interaction of the main stakeholders of the programme.
Keywords
innovation policy programme; social evaluation; institutional theory; technology projects; Croatia
References
Akcomak, S. and Ter Weel, B. (2009) Social capital, innovation and growth: Evidence from Europe, European Economic Review 53, 544-567.
Albert, M. and Laberge, S. (2007) The legitimation and dissemination process of the innovation system approach: The case of the Canadian and Quebec science and technology policy, Science, Technology & Human Values 23(2), 221-249.
Arnold, E. (2004) Evaluating research and innovation policy: A systems world needs a systems evaluation, Research Evaluation 13(1), 3-17.
Bežovan, G. (2003) Indicators of civil society development in Croatia, Društvena Istraživanja 12(3-4): 495-518 (in Croatian).
Bozeman, B. (2005) Public value mapping of science outcomes: Theory and method. A Monograph of the public value mapping project, Center for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Washington, DC. Columbia University.
Didero, M., Gareis, K., Marques, P. and Ratzke, M. (2008) Differences in innovation culture across Europe - A discussion paper (available on line: http://www.transform-eu.org/publications/documents/Differences%20in%20Innovation%20Culture.pdf. (Last access: June 2, 2010).
Edquist, C. (1997) Systems of innovation approaches - Their emergence and characteristics. In: Edquist, C. (Ed.), Systems of innovation - Technologies, institutions and organizations, pp. 41-63, Pinter/Cassell Academic, London.
Edquist, C. (2001) The systems of innovation approach and innovation policy: An account of the state of the art, Lead paper presented at the DRUID Conference, Aalborg, June 12-15, 2001.
Edquist, C., Luukkonen, T. and Sotarauta, M. (2009) Broad-based innovation policy, Ministry of Education: Evaluation of the Finnish National Innovation System - Full Report, Helsinki University Press, Helsinki.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages, Research Policy 27, 823-833.
Etzkowitz, H. (2002) MIT and the rise of entrepreneurial science, Routledge, London.
Etzkowitz, H. (2003) Learning from transition: The triple helix as an innovation system, In: Švarc, J., Lažnjak, J., Šporer, Z. and Polšek, D. (Eds.), Transition countries in the knowledge society: Socioeconomic analysis, pp. 39-61, Institute of Social Sciences, Ivo Pilar, Zagreb.
Etzkowitz, H. (2008) The triple helix university- industry-government Innovation in action, Routledge, London.
European Council. (2000) Conclusions of the Presidency of the Lisbon European Council of 23 and 24 March 2000, Council document 100/1/00, European Council, Brussels.
Fagerberg, J. and Srholec, M. (2008) National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development, Research Policy 37, 1417-1435.
Freeman, C. (1988) Japan: A new national innovation system, In: Dosi, G. et al (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory, pp. 330-349, Pinter Limited, London.
Geels, F. W. (2004) From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems, insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory, Research Policy 33, 897-920.
Georghiou, L. and Roessner, D. (2000) Evaluating technology programs: Tools and methods, Research Policy 29, 657-678.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, Sage, London.
Hsu, D. H., Roberts, E. B. and Eesley, C. E. (2007) Entrepreneurs from technology-based universities: Evidence from MIT, Research Policy 36, 768-788.
Jain, S., Georg, G. and Maltarich, M. (2009) Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity, Research Policy 38, 922-935.
Kuhlmann, S. (2003) Evaluation as a source of strategic intelligence, In: Shapira, P. and Kuhlmann, S. (Eds.), Learning from science and technology policy evaluation, pp. 352-381. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Kuhlmann, S. (2006) Evolution of research evaluation, Lecture in R&D Evaluation Course 2006. University of Twente, The Netherlands.
Lundvall, B. A. (1992) National system of innovations: Towards theory of innovation and interactive learning, Pinter, London.
Lundvall, B. A. and Borras, S. (1997) The globalizing learning economy: Implications for innovation policy. Report based on contributions from seven projects under TSER Program. DG XII, Commission of the European Union.
Luukkonen, T. (2002) Research evaluation in Europe: State of the art, Research Evaluation 11(2): 81-84.
Merton, R. K. (1936) The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action, American Sociological Review 1(6), 894-904.
Merton, R. K. (1968) Social theory and social structure, Free Press: New York.
Molas-Gallart, J. and Davies, A. (2006) Toward theory-led evaluation: The experience of European science, technology, and innovation policy, American Journal of Evaluation 27(1), 64-82.
MOST (2002a) Croatian program for innovative technological development (HITRA), The Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb.
MOST (2002b) Directives for the implementation of the HITRA Programme, The Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb.
MOST (2002c) Collected programmatic papers of the HITRA programme, The Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb, p. 78.
Mytelka, L. K. and Smith, K. (2002) Policy learning and innovation theory: An interactive and co-evolving process, Research Policy 31, 1567-1479.
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Perrin, B. (2002) How to - and how not to - Evaluate innovation, Evaluation 8(1), 13-28.
Roessner, J. D. (2002) Outcome measurement in the USA: State of the art, Research Evaluation 11(2), 85-93.
Smits, R. and Kuhlmann, S. (2004) The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy 1(172), 4-32.
Stuart, T. E. and Ding, W. W. (2006) When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences, American Journal of Sociology 112(1), 97-144.
Štulhofer, A. (2004) Perception of corruption and the erosion of social capital in Croatia 1995- 2003, Politiška Misao 41(5), 74-86.
Švarc, J. (2006) Socio-political factors and the failure of innovation policy in Croatia as a country in transition, Research Policy 35(1), 144-159.
Švarc, J., Lažnjak, J. and Šporer, Z. (2009) Social capital and innovation policy in Croatia: Scientific community as a source of innovation, In: Tripp, G., Payne, M. and Diodorus, D. (Eds.), Social capital, pp. 15-48, Nova Science, New York.
Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K. and Zimmermann, E. (2004) Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: Towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy 33, 425-441.
Županov, J. (Ed.). (1987) Egalitarism and industrialism. In: Sociology and self-management, p. 281, Školska knjiga, Zagreb (in Croatian).
eContent Home
