How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods

Factor and cluster analysis are used to identify different methods that public sector agencies in Europeuse to innovate, based on data from a 2010 survey of 3273 agencies. The analyses identify three types ofinnovative agencies: bottom-up, knowledge-scanning, and policy-dependent. The distribution of bottom-up agencies across European countries is positively correlated with average per capita incomes while thedistribution of knowledge-scanning agencies is negatively correlated with income. In contrast, there isno consistent pattern by country in the distribution of policy-dependent agencies. Regression resultsthat control for agency characteristics find that innovation methods are significantly correlated with thebeneficial outcomes of innovation, with bottom-up and knowledge-scanning agencies out-performingpolicy-dependent agencies.

A framework for analysing business performance, firm innovation and related contextual factors: Perceptions of managers and policy makers in two European regions

The aim of this paper is to propose a novel reference framework that can be used to study how different kinds of innovation can result in better business performance and how external factors can influence both the firm's capacity to innovate and innovation itself. The value of the framework is demonstrated as it is applied in an exploratory study of the perceptions of public policy makers and managers from two European regions - the Veneto Region in Italy and the East of England in the UK. Amongst other things, the data gathered suggest that managers are generally less convinced than public policy makers, that the innovativeness of a firm is affected by factors over which policy makers have some control. This finding poses the question "what, if any, role can public policy makers play in enhancing a company's competitiveness by enabling it to become more innovative?".

Broadening public input into science policy decision making: can the democratic model for science communication influence scientific, innovation and technological trajectories?

This PhD thesis investigates the potential use of science communication models to engage a broader swathe of actors in decision making in relation to scientific and technological innovation in order to address possible democratic deficits in science and technology policy-making. A four-pronged research approach has been employed to examine different representations of the public(s) and different modes of engagement. The first case study investigates whether patient-groups could represent an alternative needs-driven approach to biomedical and health sciences R & D. This is followed by enquiry into the potential for Science Shops to represent a bottom-up approach to promote research and development of local relevance. The barriers and opportunities for the involvement of scientific researchers in science communication are next investigated via a national survey which is comparable to a similar survey conducted in the UK. The final case study investigates to what extent opposition or support regarding nanotechnology (as an emerging technology) is reflected amongst the YouTube user community and the findings are considered in the context of how support or opposition to new or emerging technologies can be addressed using conflict resolution based approaches to manage potential conflict trajectories. The research indicates that the majority of communication exercises of relevance to science policy and planning take the form of a one-way flow of information with little or no facility for public feedback. This thesis proposes that a more bottom-up approach to research and technology would help broaden acceptability and accountability for decisions made relating to new or existing technological trajectories. This approach could be better integrated with and complementary to government, institutional, e.g. university, and research funding agencies activities and help ensure that public needs and issues are better addressed directly by the research community. Such approaches could also facilitate empowerment of societal stakeholders regarding scientific literacy and agenda-setting. One-way information relays could be adapted to facilitate feedback from representative groups e.g. Non-governmental organisations or Civil Society Organisations (such as patient groups) in order to enhance the functioning and socio-economic relevance of knowledge-based societies to the betterment of human livelihoods.

Afterword::Innovation, Ecological Modernisation and the ‘Post-Conflict’ Policy Agenda

Perhaps the weakest dimension of the ‘triple bottom line’ understanding of
sustainable development has been the ‘economic’ dimension. Much of the thinking
about the appropriate ‘political economy’ to underpin sustainable development has
been either utopian (as in some ‘environmental’ political views) or ‘business as usual’ approaches. Rejecting both of these utopian and realist views, it is clear from the papers presented here and the conference debates that something like ‘ecological modernisation’ is the preferred conceptualisation of ‘sustainable development’ within policy circles in Northern Ireland, the UK and other European states.