Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. De-Facto Science Policy in the Making: How Scientists Shape Science Policy and Why it Matters (or, Why STS and STP Scholars Should Socialize).Thaddeus R. Miller & Mark W. Neff - 2013 - Minerva 51 (3):295-315.
    Science and technology (S&T) policy studies has explored the relationship between the structure of scientific research and the attainment of desired outcomes. Due to the difficulty of measuring them directly, S&T policy scholars have traditionally equated “outcomes” with several proxies for evaluation, including economic impact, and academic output such as papers published and citations received. More recently, scholars have evaluated science policies through the lens of Public Value Mapping, which assesses scientific programs against societal values. Missing from these approaches is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Understanding Conceptual Impact of Scientific Knowledge on Policy: The Role of Policymaking Conditions.Jakob Edler, Maria Karaulova & Katharine Barker - 2022 - Minerva 60 (2):209-233.
    This paper presents a framework to understand the impact of scientific knowledge on the policy-making process, focusing on the conceptual impact. We note the continuing dissatisfaction with the quality and effects of science-policy interactions in both theory and practice. We critique the current literature’s emphasis on the efforts of scientists to generate policy impact, because it neglects the role of ‘user’ policymaking organisations. The framework offered in the paper develops an argument about the essential role of institutional conditions of policy (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Public Value Promises and Outcome Reporting in Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy.John P. Nelson - 2021 - Minerva 59 (4):493-513.
    U.S. federal research funding is generally justified by promises of public benefits, but the specific natures and distribution of such benefits often remain vague and ambiguous. Furthermore, the metrics by which outcomes are reported often do not necessarily or strongly imply the achievement of public benefits. These ambiguities and discontinuities make it difficult to assess the public outcomes of federal research programs. This study maps the terms in which the purposes and the outcomes of Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy -a relatively (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark