Search

The RelinC Project (“The role of research and innovation in the Covid19-crisis”) was financed by the Research Council of Norway as a “collaborative and knowledge-building project” through the BIA program. Its design and out-put reflect this. NIFU led the project in partnership with Statistics Norway. In addition, the project built on the active participation of two institutional partners: Abelia and Innovation Norway.

The MORE dataset was presented at the Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy. We highlighted how MORE3 can be used to analyze career-progression. Our hazard model showed that international mobility can increase the rate of progression but that its effect is curvilinear.

This article focuses on the interaction between intellectual property rights (IPRs) regimes and committee-based standards development organisations (SDOs) in terms of the commodification of knowledge. IPRs and SDOs are institutions that are designed to codify technical knowledge with quite different purposes though. The resulting documents describe a private right (patent) or a public good (a standard). The article associates the former with a commodification and the latter with a decommodification process of technical knowledge, and it explores a situation in which these respective purposes have come into conflict. The scope for conflict is examined and analysed in light of the controversy, which emerged during the standardization of GSM telephony in Europe.

In this article we examine the legitimacy of committee standardization as an alternative to pure market processes of technical standardization of information and communication technology (ICT). We argue that not only mandatory (regulative) but also voluntary (coordinative) standards require some kind of democratic legitimacy. While the question of how to achieve this legitimacy has become central to today's changing world of standards, this situation is not adequately reflected in how the mounting legitimacy-deficit is treated. We note here that there remains a tendency to think of the legitimacy-deficit primarily in terms of "input legitimacy" criteria. At the same time we observe a tendency for standardization organizations (SDO) to orient efforts towards achieving "output legitimacy" by developing standards that are regarded by diverse groups of (legitimizing) stakeholders as constituting "good standards". This article therefore applies the distinction between input and output legitimacy to the rapidly evolving standardization landscape, arguing that it is necessary to expand the analysis of the legitimacy-deficit in the formal bodies responsible for ICT standards. We address what democratic legitimacy means in terms of standards and standardization, discuss why it is particularly important here, and explore how it has been addressed. Current examples indicate that in order to arrive at "good" standards SDO extend and redefine the cognitive and normative frame of standardization. This frame change helps to include nontechnical and non-commercial interests and values without directly involving the growing variety of stakeholders and civil society advocates in the process., Science, Technology & Innovation Studies

This presentation showcases the value of ETDs ‘to improve graduate education and scholarship’ in a cross-country, policy context. ETDs provide the basis to reliably identify key dimensions of the dissertation (e.g. year, subject matter, relation to other publications, length and composition, degree of inter/cross-disciplinarity, etc.). They thus provide a unique vantage point to better understand the changing role that the dissertation plays in the context of the PhD candidate’s career, how it differs in different country and disciplinary contexts, how it is changing, etc. Using data-base architecture being developed in RISIS2, the presentation presents a current cross-country effort to design and set up a curated dataset of digital dissertations to study changing research careers across countries and time. The infrastructure consolidates ETDs, links information with other information (onward publication streams), provides table-graph functions and ontology tools to understand the field, and provides secure authentication and access protocols. An objective is to inform science policy and to chart how the landscape is changing and to study what that means for science.