 Frictions in the bioeconomy? A case study of policy translations and innovation practices‘Don’t Make Nanotechnology Sexy, Ensure Its Benefits, and Be Neutral’: Studying the Logics of New Intermediary Institutions in Ambiguous Governance ContextsGisle Solbu Science and Public Policy, 2021, vol. 48, issue 6, 911-920 Abstract: Building on a case study of a strategic funding initiative for biotechnology research and innovation, the paper analyses how policy objectives concerning innovation and value creation are responded to within the practices of researchers and governance actors. The paper employs an analytical perspective that centres on the interrelation between policy articulations and actors’ daily work practices and provides a novel study of how innovation demands are negotiated and made sense of within the context of three different empirical sites: national policy and science governance, intermediary science governance, and research practices. The paper addresses a problematic ‘hopeful’ mode of governance in today’s policy that is based on the idea of filling innovation deficits in current practices. As an alternative to this mode, the paper argues for the need for a more empathetic and practice-oriented policy discourse on innovation and value creation. Keywords: science governance; innovation; innovation practices; biotechnology; science policy (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:scippl:v:48:y:2021:i:6:p:911-920. 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 |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.