Journal of Science & Technology Policy | Volume 1Issue 3 | Publish date : Wednesday, October 8, 2008
A conceptual Framework for Formulating a National Strategy of Science Technology and Innovation

The theoretical and empirical literature in the filed of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Studies (STIP) contains a variety of discrete concepts, frameworks and techniques for policy making. However, an integrative framework is lacking that can guide practitioners as to how to use the research findings in a real context. This paper tries to fill the gap through probing the practical problem of formulating a national science, technology and innovation strategy using an inter-disciplinary (integrative) research method. The proposed conceptual framework is based on positioning the existing concepts, frameworks and techniques in a change management program. Application of this integrative framework is investigated for developing such a national strategy in Iran and future research opportunities in science, technology and innovation policy are suggested.

National Comprehensive Scientific Map; National Plan; Scientific Development; Innovation System

Behzad Soltani
Mahdi Kiamehr

Name & Family : Email :  
Advice :

Full text
Comment: 0
Indexed In:
Search : 6
Status :
Article ID: 535067
Publish Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008
View: 250
  • Corresponding Author:
  • References:
  •             Fagerberg, J., Innovation: A Guide to the Literature, in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, and R. Nelson, Editors. 2005, Oxford University Press: New York. p. 1-27.

    2.          Soltani, B., et al., پانزده مجلد خروجي‌هاي پروژة تهيه درخواست پيشنهادهاي پروژه‌هاي مورد نياز براي طرح تهية نقشه جامع علمي کشور. 1386, Iran National Research Institute for Science Policy: Tehran.

    .3          Newell, W., A Theory of Interdisciplinary Studies. Issues in Integrative Studies, 2001. 19: p. 1-25.

    .4          Szostak, R., How to Do Interdisciplinarity: Integrating the Debate. Issues in Integrative Studies, 2002. 20: p. 103-122.

    .5          Ragsdell, G., Engineering a paradigm shift? An holistic approach to organisational change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 2000. 13(2).

    .6          Archibugi, D., Pavitt'S Taxonomy Sixteen Years On: A Review Article. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2001. 10(5): p. 415-425.

    .7          Pavitt, K., Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 1984. 13(6): p. 343-373.

    .8          Kaplinsky, R., Globalization, Poverty and Inequality: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. 2005, Cambridge: Polity.

    .9          Chalmers, A., What Is This Thing Called Science? 1999: Hackett Publishing Company.

    .10        Pavitt, K., Social Shaping of National Science base. Research Policy, 1998. 27(8): p. 793-805.

    .11        Martin, B., A. Salter, and D. Hicks, The Relationship Between Publicly Funded Basic Research and Economic Performance. 1996, Brighton: University of Sussex.

    .12        Martin, B. and P. Nightingale, The Political Economy of Science, Technology and Innovation. 2000: Edward Elgar.

    .13        Lundvall, B.-A. and S. Borras, Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, and R. Nelson, Editors. 2005, Oxford University Press: New York.

    .14        Technology Strategy Developing UK Capability, T.S. Board, Editor. 2006, Technology Strategy Board.

    .15        DIUS, Science & innovation investment framework 2004 - 2014, DIUS, Editor. 2004.

    .16        BERR and DIUS, Supporting innovation in services, D. BERR, Editor. 2008.

    .17        Japan's Science and Technology Basic Policy Report, C.f.S.a.T. Policy, Editor. 2005.

    .18        Long-term Strategic Guidelines "Innovation 25", G.o. Japan, Editor. 2007.

    .19        Strategy for Innovative Technology, C.O. Council for Science and Technology Policy, Editor. 2008.

    .20        Yoon, S.-J., National S&T Innovation in Korea. 2006, Asian and Pacific Center for Transfer of Technology: Seoul.

    .21        MOST and KISTEP, The Future Perspectives and Technology Foresight of Korea. Challenges and Opportunities. 2005, MOST, KISTEP.

    .22        RESEARCH2015-A basis for prioritisation of strategic research, T.a.I. The Ministry of Science, Editor. 2008.

    .23        INNOVATIIONDENMARK 2007-2010, D.A.f.S.T.a. Innovation, Editor. 2007.

    24.        حسين, رحمان سرشت, رئوس برنامه تحول در علوم انساني و اجتماعي ايران. 1382, وزارت علوم تحقيقات و فناوري، معاونت فرهنگي واجتماعي، دفتر برنامه‌ريزي اجتماعي و مطالعات فرهنگي.

    .25        Freeman, C., Technology policy and economic performance; lessons from Japan. 1987, London: Frances Printer Publishers. 155.

    .26        Malerba, F., Sectoral Systems of Innovation. 2004, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    .27        Aligica, P.D., Institutional and Stakeholder Mapping: Frameworks for Policy Analysis and Institutional Change. Public Organization Review, 2006. 6: p. 79-90.

    .28        Mathews, J.A., National systems of economic learning: The case of technology diffusion management in East Asia. International Journal of Technology Management, 2001. 22(5/6).

    .29        Viotti, E.B., National Learning Systems: A new approach on technological change in late industrializing economies and evidences from the cases of Brazil and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2002. 69: p. 653-680.

    .30        Mowery, D. and N. Rosenberg, The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies. Research Policy, 1979. 8(2): p. 102-153.

    .31        OECD(1992, Innovation Manual, OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry: Paris.

    .32        Freeman, C. and L. Soete. Developing Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators: The Twenty-First Century Challenges. in Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators in a Changing World: Responding to Policy Needs. 2006. Ottawa: OECD.

    .33        Porter, A., et al., TECHNOLOGY FUTURES ANALYSIS:TOWARD INTEGRATION OF THE FIELD & NEW METHODS. 2003, Technology Futures Analysis Methods Working Group.

    .34        Martin, B. and R. Johnston, Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system: experiences in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1999. 60(1)..

    .35        Toivonen, M., Foresight in Services: Possibilities and Special Challenges. The Service Industries Journal, 2004. 24(1): p. 79-98.