Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations

By E. Arnold. 2004

252 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Innovation policy: What, why, and how (2017, background): “This raises serious questions regarding the usefulness of evaluations of individual policy instruments (Flanagan et al. , 2011) and has led to a call for more systemic evaluations (Arnold, 2004; Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004).”
Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix (2013, methodology): “, 2011) and of systemic approaches to evaluation (Arnold, 2004; Edler et al., 2008), what is missing is an articulation of the practical steps that can be taken in the context of a given policy space to provide policy-makers with intelligence on the overall functioning of the system of policies.”
Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation (2012, background): “…comparable to TED of innovation policy the normal way in which this issue is addressed is to carry out system level evaluations which look at the effectiveness of the instruments synchronously and with a view to detecting systemic failures, for example of linkage (Arnold 2004, Edler et al 2008).”
The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems (2013, background): “…have to deal not only with ‘market failures’, but most importantly with ‘system failures’1 (OECD, 1998; Smith, 2000; Jacobsson and Johnson, 2000; Arnold, 2004; Woolthuis et al., 2005), i.e. with problems rooted in the interactive behaviour of the agents in the system and the institutions…”