Institutionalizing the triple helix:: research funding and norms in the academic system

被引:158
作者
Benner, M
Sandström, U
机构
[1] Univ Lund, Dept Sociol, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden
[2] Linkoping Univ, Res Policy Grp, SE-58183 Linkoping, Sweden
关键词
triple helix; research funding; academic system;
D O I
10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00067-0
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
What are the institutional mechanisms that enable or hinder the development of new forms of knowledge production? This issue has been slightly neglected in the discussion of the "triple helix". To redress this shortcoming, the authors suggest an institutionalist complement to the triple helix model. The article analyzes the institutional regulation of academic research, with a special emphasis on how norms in the academic system are constituted via research funding. It is argued that funding is a key mechanism of change in the norm system since its reward structure influences the performance and evaluation of research. The empirical analysis is based on the public financing of technical research in Sweden, with comparisons made with other countries. The structure of research funding has been reformed in all the countries studied. In addition to continuing recognition for scientific merit, the reforms have had the effect of emphasizing the commercial potential and the societal relevance of the research supported. The two dominant models of research funding, an intra-academic model and a top-down interventionist model, seem to be replaced partly with a catalytic one. However, there are counteracting tendencies. Some agencies still reproduce a model of reputational control and a collegial orientation among researchers. It is concluded, therefore, that the forces of change and continuity are engaged in a process of negotiation about the normative regulation of academic research. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:291 / 301
页数:11
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   THE BATTLE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY - SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARADIGMS AND THE MANAGEMENT OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN BRITAIN IN THE 1980S [J].
BALMER, B ;
SHARP, M .
RESEARCH POLICY, 1993, 22 (5-6) :463-478
[2]  
BENNER M, 1996, SAMORDNAD ROLLFORDEL
[3]   NATIONAL-PRIORITIES IN ACADEMIC RESEARCH - STRATEGIC RESEARCH AND CONTRACTS IN RENEWABLE ENERGIES [J].
DALPE, R ;
ANDERSON, F .
RESEARCH POLICY, 1995, 24 (04) :563-581
[4]  
Di Maggio P.J., 1991, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, V17
[5]  
Douglas Mary, 1986, How Institutions Think
[6]  
ELIASSON K, 1998, FORSKNINGSBEREDNINGE, V1, P8
[7]  
Elzinga A., 1985, U RES SYSTEM
[8]  
ETZKOWITZ H, TRIPLE HELIX MIT RIS
[9]  
*HMSO, 1993, REALISING OUR POTENT
[10]  
LEYDESDORFF L, 1996, SCI PUBLIC POLICY, V23