lynx   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/2018-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Relation Between Research Priorities and Societal Demands: The Case of Rice

Author

Listed:
  • Tommaso Ciarli

    (SPRU, University of Sussex, UK)

  • Ismael Ràfols

    (Ingenio (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politecnica Valencia, Spain; CWTS, University of Leiden, The Netherlands; SPRU, University of Sussex, UK)

Abstract
To what extent is scientific research related to societal needs? To answer this crucial question systematically we need to contrast indicators of research priorities with indicators of societal needs. We focus on rice research and technology between 1983 and 2012. We combine quantitative methods that allow investigation of the relation between `revealed' research priorities and `revealed' societal demands, measured respectively by research output (publications) and national accounts of rice use and farmers' and consumers' rice related needs. We employ new bibliometric data, methods and indicators to identify countries' main rice research topics (priorities) from publications. For a panel of countries, we estimate the relation between revealed research priorities and revealed demands. We find that, across countries and time, societal demands explain a country's research trajectory to a limited extent. Some research priorities are nicely aligned to societal demands, con rming that science is partly related to societal needs. However, we find a relevant number of misalignments between the focus of rice research and revealed demands, crucially related to human consumption and nutrition. We discuss some implications for research policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Tommaso Ciarli & Ismael Ràfols, 2018. "The Relation Between Research Priorities and Societal Demands: The Case of Rice," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-12, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2018-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=2018-12-swps-ciarli-and-rfols.pdf&site=25
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2009. "How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 971-983, July.
    2. Fuchs, Doris & Glaab, Katharina, 2011. "Material power and normative conflict in global and local agrifood governance: The lessons of ‘Golden Rice’ in India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 729-735.
    3. Herdt, Robert W., 2012. "People, institutions, and technology: A personal view of the role of foundations in international agricultural research and development 1960–2010," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 179-190.
    4. Ligon, Ethan A. & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2011. "Estimating the effects of aggregate agricultural growth on the distribution of expenditures," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4435r7bm, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    5. Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Bart Verspagen, 2009. "Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks. An application to data communication standards," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 311-336.
    6. Joly, P.B. & Gaunand, A. & Colinet, L. & Larédo, P. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M., 2015. "ASIRPA: a comprehensive theory-based approach to assessing the societal impacts of a research organization," Working Papers 2015-04, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    7. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    8. Chataway, Joanna & Tait, Joyce & Wield, David, 2004. "Understanding company R&D strategies in agro-biotechnology: trajectories and blind spots," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 1041-1057, September.
    9. Nelson, Richard R., 2003. "On the uneven evolution of human know-how," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 909-922, June.
    10. John C. Driscoll & Aart C. Kraay, 1998. "Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially Dependent Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 549-560, November.
    11. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    12. Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols & Michael M. Hopkins & Loet Leydesdorff, 2017. "Strategic intelligence on emerging technologies: Scientometric overlay mapping," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(1), pages 214-233, January.
    13. Arthur, W Brian, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 406-411, May.
    14. Freeman, Chris, 1995. "The 'National System of Innovation' in Historical Perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 5-24, February.
    15. Bal, H. K. & Kahlon, A. S., 1977. "Methodology Issues on Measurement of Returns to Investment in Agricultural Research," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(3), July.
    16. Dana G Dalrymple, 2006. "Setting the agenda for science and technology in the public sector: the case of international agricultural research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 277-290, May.
    17. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman & Ed C. M. Noyons & Reindert K. Buter, 2010. "Automatic term identification for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 581-596, March.
    18. Gregory D. Graff, 2003. "Observing Technological Trajectories in Patent Data: Empirical Methods to Study the Emergence and Growth of New Technologies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1266-1274.
    19. Alastair Orr, 2012. "Why were So Many Social Scientists Wrong about the Green Revolution? Learning from Bangladesh," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(11), pages 1565-1586, November.
    20. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    21. Richard P. Barke & Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith, 1993. "Politics and Scientific Expertise: Scientists, Risk Perception, and Nuclear Waste Policy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 425-439, August.
    22. Matt, M. & Gaunand, A. & Joly, P-B. & Colinet, L., 2017. "Opening the black box of impact – Ideal-type impact pathways in a public agricultural research organization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 207-218.
    23. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Sarewitz, 2005. "Public values and public failure in US science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 119-136, April.
    24. Ely, Adrian & Van Zwanenberg, Patrick & Stirling, Andrew, 2014. "Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 505-518.
    25. Deepthi Elizabeth Kolady & David J. Spielman & Anthony Cavalieri, 2012. "The Impact of Seed Policy Reforms and Intellectual Property Rights on Crop Productivity in India," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 361-384, June.
    26. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    27. Sumberg, J., 2002. "The logic of fodder legumes in Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 285-300, June.
    28. McGuire, Shawn J., 2008. "Path-dependency in plant breeding: Challenges facing participatory reforms in the Ethiopian Sorghum Improvement Program," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 139-149, March.
    29. Yaqub, Ohid, 2018. "Serendipity: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 169-179.
    30. Cowan, Robin & Gunby, Philip, 1996. "Sprayed to Death: Path Dependence, Lock-In and Pest Control Strategies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(436), pages 521-542, May.
    31. Leslie A Gillum & Christopher Gouveia & E Ray Dorsey & Mark Pletcher & Colin D Mathers & Charles E McCulloch & S Claiborne Johnston, 2011. "NIH Disease Funding Levels and Burden of Disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-9, February.
    32. Wallace, Matthew L. & Ràfols, Ismael, 2018. "Institutional shaping of research priorities: A case study on avian influenza," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1975-1989.
    33. Jack Spaapen & Leonie van Drooge, 2011. "Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 211-218, September.
    34. Ronald Herring, 2007. "The genomics revolution and development studies: Science, poverty and politics," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 1-30.
    35. Pingali, Prabhu L & Rozelle, Scott D & Gerpacio, Roberta V, 2001. "The Farmer's Voice in Priority Setting: A Cross-Country Experiment in Eliciting Technological Preferences," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(3), pages 591-609, April.
    36. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Institutionalizing end-user demand steering in agricultural R&D: Farmer levy funding of R&D in The Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 460-472, April.
    37. Philip G. Pardey & Connie Chan-Kang & Steven P. Dehmer & Jason M. Beddow, 2016. "Agricultural R&D is on the move," Nature, Nature, vol. 537(7620), pages 301-303, September.
    38. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    39. Anabel Marin & Lilia Stubrin & Patrick van Zwanenberg, 2014. "Developing capabilities in the seed industry: which direction to follow?," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-12, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    40. Bart Verspagen, 2007. "Mapping Technological Trajectories As Patent Citation Networks: A Study On The History Of Fuel Cell Research," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(01), pages 93-115.
    41. Cassi, Lorenzo & Lahatte, Agénor & Rafols, Ismael & Sautier, Pierre & de Turckheim, Élisabeth, 2017. "Improving fitness: Mapping research priorities against societal needs on obesity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 1095-1113.
    42. Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2008. "Why are ecological, low-input, multi-resistant wheat cultivars slow to develop commercially? A Belgian agricultural 'lock-in' case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 436-446, June.
    43. Wright, Brian D., 2012. "Grand missions of agricultural innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1716-1728.
    44. Parayil, Govindan, 2003. "Mapping technological trajectories of the Green Revolution and the Gene Revolution from modernization to globalization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 971-990, June.
    45. W. Brian Arthur, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning, Bounded Rationality and the Bar Problem," Working Papers 94-03-014, Santa Fe Institute.
    46. Michael Eisenstein, 2014. "Biotechnology: Against the grain," Nature, Nature, vol. 514(7524), pages 55-57, October.
    47. Mowery, David & Rosenberg, Nathan, 1993. "The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-108, April.
    48. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman & Rommert Dekker & Jan van den Berg, 2010. "A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2405-2416, December.
    49. Matthew L. Wallace & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    50. Possas, Mario Luiz & Salles-Filho, Sergio & da Silveira, JoseMaria, 1996. "An evolutionary approach to technological innovation in agriculture: some preliminary remarks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 933-945, September.
    51. Kazuko Morooka & Mila M. Ramos & Fonseca N. Nathaniel, 2014. "A bibliometric approach to interdisciplinarity in Japanese rice research and technology development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 73-98, January.
    52. Rafols, Ismael & Ciarli, Tommaso & Chavarro, Diego, 2015. "Under-reporting research relevant to local needs in the global south. Database biases in the representation of knowledge on rice," SocArXiv 3kf9d, Center for Open Science.
    53. James Sumberg & John Thompson & Philip Woodhouse, 2013. "Why agronomy in the developing world has become contentious," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(1), pages 71-83, March.
    54. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    55. Dominic Hogg, 2000. "Technological Change in Agriculture," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-333-98125-2, December.
    56. Loet Leydesdorff & Iina Hellsten, 2006. "Measuring the meaning of words in contexts: An automated analysis of controversies about 'Monarch butterflies,' 'Frankenfoods,' and 'stem cells'," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(2), pages 231-258, May.
    57. Kelley, T. G. & Ryan, J. G. & Patel, B. K., 1995. "Applied participatory priority setting in international agricultural research: Making trade-offs transparent and explicit," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 177-216.
    58. Mina, A. & Ramlogan, R. & Tampubolon, G. & Metcalfe, J.S., 2007. "Mapping evolutionary trajectories: Applications to the growth and transformation of medical knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 789-806, June.
    59. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 260-276, June.
    60. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "The social shaping of the national science base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 793-805, December.
    61. Ruttan, Vernon W, 1997. "Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence:," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1520-1529, September.
    62. George W. Norton & Philip G. Pardey & Julian M. Alston, 1992. "Economic Issues in Agricultural Research Priority Setting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(5), pages 1089-1094.
    63. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan & Noyons, Ed C.M., 2010. "A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 629-635.
    64. Christopher Freeman, 1991. "Innovation, Changes of Techno-Economic Paradigm and Biological Analogies in Economics," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 42(2), pages 211-232.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Confraria, Hugo & Ciarli, Tommaso & Noyons, Ed, 2024. "Countries' research priorities in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    2. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    3. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    4. Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2009. "How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 971-983, July.
    5. Muhamed Kudic & Mariia Shkolnykova, 2020. "From biotech to bioeconomy: New empirical evidence on the technological transition to plant-based bioeconomy based on patent data," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2002, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    6. Ramani, Shyama V. & Thutupalli, Ajay, 2015. "Emergence of controversy in technology transitions: Green Revolution and Bt cotton in India," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 198-212.
    7. Junmo Kim & Juneseuk Shin, 2018. "Mapping extended technological trajectories: integration of main path, derivative paths, and technology junctures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1439-1459, September.
    8. Alessandri, Enrico, 2023. "Identifying technological trajectories in the mining sector using patent citation networks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    9. van Eck, Nees Jan & Waltman, Ludo, 2014. "CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 802-823.
    10. Huang, Ying & Li, Ruinan & Zou, Fang & Jiang, Lidan & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Lin, 2022. "Technology life cycle analysis: From the dynamic perspective of patent citation networks," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    11. Marin, Anabel & Stubrin, Lilia & van Zwanenberg, Patrick, 2023. "Technological lock-in in action: Appraisal and policy commitment in Argentina's seed sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    12. Ichiro Watanabe & Soichiro Takagi, 2021. "Technological Trajectory Analysis of Patent Citation Networks: Examining the Technological Evolution of Computer Graphic Processing Systems," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, June.
    13. Kevin Maréchal & Hélène Aubaret-Joachain & Jean-Paul Ledant, 2008. "The influence of Economics on agricultural systems: an evolutionary and ecological perspective," Working Papers CEB 08-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    14. Tommaso Ciarli & Karolina Safarzynska, 2020. "Sustainability and Industrial Challenge: The Hindering Role of Complexity," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    16. Filippo Corsini & Rafael Laurenti & Franziska Meinherz & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora, 2019. "The Advent of Practice Theories in Research on Sustainable Consumption: Past, Current and Future Directions of the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    17. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    18. Martinelli, Arianna, 2012. "An emerging paradigm or just another trajectory? Understanding the nature of technological changes using engineering heuristics in the telecommunications switching industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 414-429.
    19. Magrini, Marie-Benoit & Anton, Marc & Cholez, Célia & Corre-Hellou, Guenaelle & Duc, Gérard & Jeuffroy, Marie-Hélène & Meynard, Jean-Marc & Pelzer, Elise & Voisin, Anne-Sophie & Walrand, Stéphane, 2016. "Why are grain-legumes rarely present in cropping systems despite their environmental and nutritional benefits? Analyzing lock-in in the French agrifood system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 152-162.
    20. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research priority; agenda setting; research trajectories; societal needs; scientometrics; rice;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2018-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.
    Лучший частный хостинг