What lies beneath: Avoiding the risk of under-evaluation

Luke Georghiou

Science and Public Policy, 2007, vol. 34, issue 10, 743-752

Abstract: Two propositions are explored: that present R&D evaluation methods risk missing key effects; that there is a tendency to underestimate the effects of public support. Using the example of a recent impact assessment of the EUREKA initiative, the paper seeks to show the limitations of typical questionnaire approaches. As an alternative, it introduces the ‘Iceberg Model’ as a metaphor for hidden effects and, building on work such as the BETA method and measurement of externalities, uses high-impact case studies to illustrate the importance of strategic behavioural effects and the use of technologies developed beyond the goals of the funded project. It is concluded that questionnaires are best used to identify the small proportion of projects that account for most effects and then resources should be focused on deep probes of these projects. The role of government in affecting positive strategic decisions or firms' routines should also be explored. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234207X259003 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:scippl:v:34:y:2007:i:10:p:743-752

Access Statistics for this article

Science and Public Policy is currently edited by Nicoletta Corrocher, Jeong-Dong Lee, Mireille Matt and Nicholas Vonortas

More articles in Science and Public Policy from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().