1. Federal Research and Innovation Policies and Canadian Universities: A Framework for Analysis

Doern, G. Bruce; Stoney, Christopher

doi:10.3138/9781442697478-003

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Universities in Canada are “creatures of the provinces” (Doern and Stoney : 3) and “[h]igher education in Canada is best understood as the sum of 13 quite different and distinct provincial and territorial systems, each with its own, unique regulatory environment” (Jones and Noumi : 102). All six institutions in our case study operated under provincial legislation, received provincial operating funding, were subject to provincial regulation and had provincial government appointees on their boards.…”

Section: Canadian Federalism and University Education And Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Federalism and university governance in Canada

Eastman¹,

Jones²,

Bégin‐Caouette³

et al. 2019

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is increasing interest in how universities are governed, externally and internally (Austin and Jones 2016). Drawing on a comparative case study of the governance of six major Canadian universities and the literature, this article describes the impact of federal research and innovation policy and programs on universities and reflects on Ottawa's role. We suggest that the federal government participates in the external governance of universities, but in a way that differs significantly from provincial governments. Canadian federalism appears to be generally beneficial for university autonomy and examination of its operation sheds light on factors that enable universities to sustain their autonomy.

show abstract

Section: Canadian Federalism and University Education And Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Federalism and university governance in Canada

Eastman¹,

Jones²,

Bégin‐Caouette³

et al. 2019

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EU), and global (Shapira et al, 2001;Perry & May, 2007;Laranja et al, 2008;Langfeldt et al, 2012);  the rise of 'new public management' with its demands for public accountability, e.g. in the form of performance indicators (Elzinga, 2010(Elzinga, & 2012Doern & Stoney, 2009a);  efforts to raise the level of public engagement -there have been growing demands for greater public involvement in issues relating to science and technology, in particular where there are historical sensitivities or an element of 'risk' is perceived to be involved (Jacob, 2005);  initiatives responding to 'Grand Challenges' -since these are global in nature and also cross-cut other traditional boundaries (e.g. those of government ministries), R&D policy needs to be integrated within a much broader array of policies (Cagnin et al, 2012).…”

Section: From National To Multi-level Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…university-industry) and countries. With this has come a growing emphasis on networks, clusters and other forms of collaborative links as opposed to the previous focus of policy instruments on individual actors (whether individual researchers, research teams, laboratories, firms or other organisations) (Doern & Stoney, 2009a). All of this makes policy design and the choice of policy instruments far more complicated (Aksnes et al, 2008).…”

Section: From Individual Researchers/teams/labs/firms To Collaboratiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Landry and Vrone (2005) showed how the shift in rationale for government intervention from 'market failure' has implications for the choice of policy instruments with respect to (i) the unit of analysis (from individual actors to collaboration and networks), (ii) the intended target (from R&D funding to skills and knowledge exchange), and (iii) the key actors (from individual firms to firms in a cluster, region or sector). Doern and Stoney (2009a) also tried to bridge the gap, applying the concepts and analytical frameworks of policy design to policies aimed at strengthening innovation systems. Similarly, Henriques and Larédo (2013) have drawn upon the policy design framework with its five main stages in the policy cycle to help analyse the historical evolution of science policy.…”

Section: Development Of a Rigorous Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

R&D policy instruments – a critical review of what we do and don’t know

Martin

2016

Industry and Innovation

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article (Accepted Version) http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Martin, Ben R (2016) R&D policy instruments -a critical review of what we do and don't know. Industry and Innovation, 23 (2). pp. 157-176. ISSN 1366157-176. ISSN -2716 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/58671/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. R&D Policy Instruments -a Critical Review of What We Do and Don't Know AbstractIn recent years, the term 'policy instrument' has been used more frequently with regard to R&D policy and innovation policy. What does this term mean? Where did it come from? What do we know about it, both with regard to the general field of policy studies but also in the specific context of R&D policy? This article examines the development of the notion of policy instruments as part of a body of research known as 'policy design'. Over the last 50 years, there has been substantial progress in setting policy design on a more systematic basis, with the development of established concepts and analytical frameworks, including various taxonomies of policy instruments. However, with just a few exceptions, this body of research seems to have had little impact in the world of R&D policy. The paper reviews the literature on R&D policy instruments. It identifies a number of challenges for R&D policy instruments in the light of four transitions -the shift from linear to systemic thinking about R&D and innovation, the shift from national governments to multi-level governance, the shift from individual actors to collaborations and networks, and the shift from individual policies to policy mixes. It sets out a research agenda for the study of R&D policy instruments, before ending with a number of conclusions.

show abstract

“…Using these terms as a guide, I briefly summarize the core developments within these articles below. Within S&T policy research, scholars have pointed to two primary policy changes (dating back to the 1980s) that have influenced university activities: performance‐based funding and patent law reforms (Doern & Stony, ; Fisher & Rubenson, ). Because the next section focuses in on patent laws, the following discussion will focus primarily on the effects of funding policies on university knowledge transfer.…”

Section: Universitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Trends in Science and Technology Policy Research: An Examination of Published Works from 2010–2012

Trousset¹

2014

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay identifies three notable trends in recent science and technology policy research. By analyzing the keywords listed within published scholarship from 2010–2012, a predominant portion of articles focuses on universities, patenting, and innovation policy models. Scholars have gained some insight into these processes by focusing on how collaborations between the government, universities, and industry impact technological outcomes. However, data and measurement issues have limited research in this area.

show abstract

1. Federal Research and Innovation Policies and Canadian Universities: A Framework for Analysis

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Federalism and university governance in Canada

Federalism and university governance in Canada

R&D policy instruments – a critical review of what we do and don’t know

Current Trends in Science and Technology Policy Research: An Examination of Published Works from 2010–2012

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About