- -

Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

dc.contributor.author Wallace, Matthew es_ES
dc.contributor.author Rafols García, Ismael es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2017-07-06T06:44:58Z
dc.date.available 2017-07-06T06:44:58Z
dc.date.issued 2015-06
dc.identifier.issn 0026-4695
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/84529
dc.description.abstract [EN] Funding agencies and large public scientific institutions are increasingly using the term "research portfolio" as a means of characterizing their research. While portfolios have long been used as a heuristic for managing corporate R&D (i.e. R&D aimed at gaining tangible economic benefits), they remain ill-defined in a science policy context where research is aimed at achieving societal outcomes. In this article we analyze the discursive uses of the term "research portfolio" and propose some general considerations for their application in science policy. We explore the use of the term in private R&D and related scholarly literature in existing science policy practices, and seek insight in relevant literature in science policy scholarship. While the financial analogy can in some instances be instructive, a simple transposition from the world of finance or of corporate R&D to public research is problematic. However, we do identify potentially fruitful uses of portfolio analysis in science policy. In particular, our review suggests that the concept of research portfolio can indeed be a useful analytical instrument for tackling complex societal challenges. Specifically, the strands of scholarship identified suggest that the use of research portfolio should: i) recognize the diversity of research lines relevant for a given societal challenge, given the uncertainty and ambiguity of research outcomes; ii) examine the relationships between research options of a portfolio and the expected societal outcomes; and iii) adopt a systemic perspective to research portfolios - i.e. examine a portfolio as a functional whole, rather than as the sum of its parts. We argue that with these considerations, portfolio-driven approaches may foster social inclusion in science policy decisions, help deliberation between "alternative" portfolios to tackle complex societal challenges, as well as promote cost-effectiveness and transparency. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship We thank Tommaso Ciarli, Jochen Glaser, Jordi Molas-Gallart, Richard Wooley, and two anonymous referees for their insightful comments and suggestions. We acknowledge support from the UK Economic and Social Research Council (Grant RES-360-25-0076, Mapping the Development of Emergent Technologies) and the FP7 EU Marie Curie Integration Grant to IR (MapRePort). en_EN
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher Springer Verlag (Germany) es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Minerva es_ES
dc.rights Reserva de todos los derechos es_ES
dc.subject Science policy es_ES
dc.subject Research portfolio es_ES
dc.subject Prioritisation es_ES
dc.subject Research landscape es_ES
dc.subject Societal challenges es_ES
dc.title Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.1007/s11024-015-9271-8
dc.relation.projectID info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ESRC//RES-360-25-0076/GB/Mapping the Dynamics of Emergent Technologies/
dc.relation.projectID info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/334452/EU/Mapping and assessment of research portfolios/ es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento - Institut de Gestió de la Innovació i del Coneixement es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Wallace, M.; Rafols García, I. (2015). Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits. Minerva. 53(2):89-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-015-9271-8 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion http://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-015-9271-8 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 89 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 115 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 53 es_ES
dc.description.issue 2 es_ES
dc.relation.senia 303523 es_ES
dc.identifier.eissn 1573-1871
dc.contributor.funder Economic and Social Research Council, Reino Unido
dc.contributor.funder European Commission
dc.description.references Agarwal, Pankaj, and David B Searls. 2009. Can literature analysis identify innovation drivers in drug discovery? Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 8. Nature Publishing Group: 865–78. doi: 10.1038/nrd2973 . es_ES
dc.description.references Altman, Edward I., and Anthony Saunders. 1998. Credit risk measurement: Developments over the last 20 years. Journal of Banking and Finance 21: 1721–1742. es_ES
dc.description.references Arnold, Erik. 2004. Evaluating research and innovation policy: A systems world needs systems evaluations. Research Evaluation 13: 3–17. es_ES
dc.description.references Awerbuch, Shimon. 2006. Portfolio-Based Electricity Generation Planning: Policy Implications For Renewables And Energy Security. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 11: 693–710. doi: 10.1007/s11027-006-4754-4 . es_ES
dc.description.references Bazilian, Morgan, and Fabien Roque (eds.). 2008. No Analytical Methods for Energy Diversity and Security: Portfolio Optimization in the Energy Sector: A Tribute to the Work of Dr. Shimon Awerbuch. Amsterdam: Elsevier. es_ES
dc.description.references Bernard Cohen, I. 1993. Analogy, Homology, and Metaphor in the Interactions between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences, Especially Economics. In Non-natural Social Science: Reflecting on the Enterprise of More Heat than Light, ed. Neil de Marchi, 7–44. Durham: Duke University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Boaz, Annette, Siobhan Fitzpatrick, and Ben Shaw. 2008. Assessing the impact of research on policy: A review of the literature for a project on bridging research and policy through outcome evaluation Final report with references and appendices, February 2008. es_ES
dc.description.references Boyack, Kevin W., and Paul Jordan. 2011. Metrics associated with NIH funding: A high-level view. JAMIA 18: 423–431. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000213 . es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, Barry, and Juan Rogers. 2001. Strategic management of government-sponsored R&D portfolios. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 19: 413–442. doi: 10.1068/c1v . es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, Barry, and Daniel Sarewitz. 2005. Public values and public failure in US science policy. Science and Public Policy 32(2): 119–136. es_ES
dc.description.references Bozeman, Barry, and Daniel Sarewitz. 2011. Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation. Minerva 49(1): 1–23. doi: 10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7 . es_ES
dc.description.references Brooks, Harvey. 1978. The Problem of Research Priorities. Daedelus 107: 171–190. es_ES
dc.description.references Buxton, Martin, Leonie Sundmacher, Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz, Liz Allen, Nick Black, David Cox, Helen Munn, Briony Rayfield, Eddy Nason, and Jon Sussex. 2008. Medical Research: What's it worth? Estimating the economic benefits from medical research in the UK. London: Health Economics Research Group, Office of Health Economics, RAND Europe. es_ES
dc.description.references Calvert, Jane. 2006. What’s Special about Basic Research? Science, Technology & Human Values 31: 199–220. doi: 10.1177/0162243905283642 . es_ES
dc.description.references Chalmers, Iain, M.B. Bracken, and Ben Djulbegovic. 2014. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. The Lancet: 7–16. es_ES
dc.description.references Chien, Chen–Fu. 2002. A portfolio–evaluation framework for selecting R&D projects. R&D Management 32: 359–368. doi: 10.1111/1467-9310.00266 . es_ES
dc.description.references Cozzens, Susan. 1997. The knowledge pool: Measurement challenges in evaluating fundamental research programs. Evaluation and Program Planning 20: 77–89. doi: 10.1016/S0149-7189(96)00038-9 . es_ES
dc.description.references Cozzens, Susan, and Michelle Snoeck. 2010. Knowledge to Policy Contributing to the Measurement of Social, Health, and Environmental Benefits. Paper prepared for the Workshop on the Science of Science Measurement: 1–39. es_ES
dc.description.references Dasgupta, Partha, and Eric Maskin. 2012. The Simple Economics of Research Portfolios. The Economic Journal 97: 581–595. es_ES
dc.description.references Devinney, Timothy M., and David W. Stewart. 1988. Rethinking the Product Portfolio: A Generalized Investment Model. Management Science 34: 1080–1095. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.34.9.1080 . es_ES
dc.description.references Dietz, James S., and Juan D. Rogers. 2012. Meanings and policy implications of “transformative research”: Frontiers, hot science, evolution, and investment risk. Minerva 50(1): 21–44. doi: 10.1007/s11024-012-9190-x . es_ES
dc.description.references Dolby, Kevin, Jimmy Whitworth, Marta Tufet, Suzi Morris, Jessica Burnett, Lily Ickowitz-Seidler, Annie Sanderson, Dave Carr, and Jo Scott. 2012. Malaria 1990–2009. London: Wellcome Trust. es_ES
dc.description.references Eikenberry, Angela M., and Jodie Drapal Kluver. 2004. The Marketization of the Nonprofit Sector: Civil Society at Risk. Public Administration Review 64: 132–140. es_ES
dc.description.references Ely, Adrian, Patrick Van Zwanenberg, and Andrew Stirling. 2014. Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation. Research Policy 43: 505–518. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.09.004 . es_ES
dc.description.references Ernst, Holger. 1998. Patent portfolios for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 15: 279–308. doi: 10.1016/S0923-4748(98)00018-6 . es_ES
dc.description.references European Commission. 2005. Impact assessment and ex ante evaluation. Brussels. es_ES
dc.description.references Evans, James A., Jae-Mahn Shim, and John P. Ioannidis. 2014. Attention to local health burden and the global disparity of health research. PloS One 9: e90147. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090147 . es_ES
dc.description.references Feller, Irwin. 2012. Performance measures as forms of evidence for science and technology policy decisions. The Journal of Technology Transfer 38: 565–576. doi: 10.1007/s10961-012-9264-9 . es_ES
dc.description.references Fernandez, Eduardo, Edy Lopez, Gustavo Mazcorro, Rafael Olmedo, and Carlos Coello Coello. 2013. Application of the non-outranked sorting genetic algorithm to public project portfolio selection. Information Sciences 228: 131–149. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2012.11.018 . es_ES
dc.description.references Fisher, Erik, Catherine P. Slade, Derrick Anderson, and Barry Bozeman. 2010. The public value of nanotechnology? Scientometrics 85: 29–39. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0237-1 . es_ES
dc.description.references Foray, Dominique, David C. Mowery, and Richard R. Nelson. 2012. Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs? Research Policy 41: 1697–1702. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.07.011 . es_ES
dc.description.references Freeman, Christopher. 1991. Innovation, Changes of Techno-Economic Paradigm and Biological Analogies in Economics. Revue économique 42: 211. doi: 10.2307/3502005 . es_ES
dc.description.references Frodeman, Robert, and Adam Briggle. 2012. The dedisciplining of peer review. Minerva 50(1): 3–19. doi: 10.1007/s11024-012-9192-8 . es_ES
dc.description.references Garfinkel, Michele S., Daniel Sarewitz, and Alan L. Porter. 2006. A societal outcomes map for health research and policy. American Journal of Public Health 96: 441–446. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.063495 . es_ES
dc.description.references Geels, Frank W. 2004. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Research Policy 33: 897–920. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015 . es_ES
dc.description.references Georghiou, Luke. 1998. Issues in the Evaluation of Innovation and Technology Policy. Evaluation 4: 37–51. doi: 10.1177/13563899822208374 . es_ES
dc.description.references Ghiselin, Michael T. 1978. The Economy of the Body. The American Economic Review 68: 233–237. es_ES
dc.description.references Gläser, Jochen. 2012. Jochen Gläser on the possibility of a sociological middle-range theory linking science. TUTS-WP-1-2012. Technical University Technology Studies Working Papers. Berlin. es_ES
dc.description.references Golec, Joseph H. 1996. The effects of mutual fund managers’ characteristics on their portfolio performance, risk and fees. Financial Services Review 5: 133–147. doi: 10.1016/S1057-0810(96)90006-2 . es_ES
dc.description.references Guthrie, Susan, Benoit Guerin, Helen Wu, Sharif Ismail, and Steven Wooding. 2013. Alternatives to Peer Review in Research Project Funding. es_ES
dc.description.references Haak, Laurel L., Will Ferriss, Kevin Wright, Michael E. Pollard, Kirk Barden, Matt A. Probus, Michael Tartakovsky, and Charles J. Hackett. 2012. The electronic Scientific Portfolio Assistant: Integrating scientific knowledge databases to support program impact assessment. Science and Public Policy 39: 464–475. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scs030 . es_ES
dc.description.references Hage, Jerald, Gretchen B. Jordan, and Jonathan Mote. 2007. A theory-based innovation systems framework for evaluating diverse portfolios of research, part two: Macro indicators and policy interventions. Science and Public Policy 34: 731–741. doi: 10.3152/030234207X265385 . es_ES
dc.description.references Hammerstein, Peter, and Edward H. Hagen. 2005. The second wave of evolutionary economics in biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 604–609. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.07.012 . es_ES
dc.description.references Hanney, Stephen R. 2003. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Research 28: 1–28. es_ES
dc.description.references Hanney, Stephen R., Iain Frame, Jonathan Grant, Martin Buxton, Tracey Young, and Grant Lewison. 2005. Using categorisations of citations when assessing the outcomes from health research. Scientometrics 65: 357–379. es_ES
dc.description.references Hausmann, Ricardo, César A. Hidalgo, Sebastián Bustos, Michele Coscia, Alexander Simoes, and Muhammed A. Yildirim. 2013. The atlas of economic complexity: Mapping paths to prosperity. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Centre for International Development, Harvard University. es_ES
dc.description.references Hicks, Diana. 2014. “What are grand challenges?” The selected works of Diana Hicks. http://works.bepress.com/diana_hicks/38 . (unpublished). es_ES
dc.description.references Holbrook, J. Britt, and Robert Frodeman. 2011. Peer review and the ex ante assessment of societal impacts. Research Evaluation 20: 239–246. doi: 10.3152/095820211X12941371876788 . es_ES
dc.description.references Ioannidis, John P. 2011. Fund people not projects. Nature 477: 529–531. es_ES
dc.description.references Ioannidis, John P. 2014. How to Make More Published Research True. PLoS Medicine 11: e1001747. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747 . es_ES
dc.description.references Ismail, Sharif, Jan Tiessen, and Steven Wooding. 2010. Strengthening Research Portfolio Evaluation at the Medical Research Council. es_ES
dc.description.references Jordan, Gretchen B., Jerald Hage, and Jonathon Mote. 2008. A theories-based systemic framework for evaluating diverse portfolios of scientific work, part 1: Micro and meso indicators. New Directions for Evaluation 2008: 7–24. es_ES
dc.description.references Kay, Luciano, Nils Newman, Jan Youtie, Alan L. Porter, and Ismael Rafols. 2014. Patent Overlay Mapping: Visualizing Technological Distance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 65: 2432–2443. doi: 10.1002/asi.23146 . es_ES
dc.description.references Kuehn, Bridget M. 2012. US Reviews High-Risk Research Portfolio. JAMA 307: 1682. es_ES
dc.description.references Kuhn, Thomas S. 1979. Metaphor in science. In Metaphor and Thought, ed. A. Ortony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Largent, Mark A., and Julia Lane. 2012. STAR METRICS and the Science of Science Policy. Review of Policy Research 29: 431–438. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2012.00567.x . es_ES
dc.description.references Laudel, Grit, and Jochen Gläser. 2014. Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding. Research Policy 43: 1204–1216. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.02.006 . es_ES
dc.description.references Liggins, Charlene, Lisa Pryor, and Marie A. Bernard. 2010. Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Models of Care for Older Adults: An Assessment of the National Institute on Aging Research Portfolio. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 58: 2345–2349. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03157.x . es_ES
dc.description.references Linton, Jonathan D., Steven T. Walsh, and Joseph Morabito. 2002. Analysis, ranking and selection of R&D projects in a portfolio. R&D Management 32: 139–148. doi: 10.1111/1467-9310.00246 . es_ES
dc.description.references Luo, Lieh-Ming. 2011. Optimal diversification for R&D project portfolios. Scientometrics 91: 219–229. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0537-0 . es_ES
dc.description.references Marburger, John. 2005. Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (Washington, D.C.). es_ES
dc.description.references Markowitz, Harry. 1952. Portfolio Selection. Journal of Finance 7: 77–91. es_ES
dc.description.references Marres, Noortje, and Esther Weltevrede. 2013. SCRAPING THE SOCIAL? Journal of Cultural Economy 6:313–335. doi: 10.1080/17530350.2013.772070 . es_ES
dc.description.references Martin, Ben R. 2011. The Research Excellence Framework and the “impact agenda”: Are we creating a Frankenstein monster? Research Evaluation 20: 247–254. doi: 10.3152/095820211X13118583635693 . es_ES
dc.description.references McGeary, Michael, and Philip M. Smith. 1996. The R&D portfolio: A concept for allocating science and technology funds. Science 274: 1484–1485. es_ES
dc.description.references Meador, Kimford J., Jacqueline French, David W. Loring, and Page B. Pennell. 2011. Disparities in NIH funding for epilepsy research. Neurology 77: 1305–1307. es_ES
dc.description.references Mirowski, Philip. 1991. More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Molas-Gallart, Jordi, and Puay Tang. 2011. Tracing “productive interactions” to identify social impacts: An example from the social sciences. Research Evaluation 20: 219–226. doi: 10.3152/095820211X12941371876706 . es_ES
dc.description.references Moravcsik, Michael J. 1984. Life in a multidimensional world. Scientometrics 6: 75–85. doi: 10.1007/BF02021280 . es_ES
dc.description.references Moravcsik, Michael J. 1988. The limits of science and the scientific method. Research Policy 17: 293–299. es_ES
dc.description.references Mowery, David C. 2012. Defense-related R&D as a model for “Grand Challenges” technology policies. Research Policy 41: 1703–1715. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.027 . es_ES
dc.description.references National Research Council. 2005. A prospective evaluation of applied energy research and development at DOE (Phase One). Washington. es_ES
dc.description.references National Research Council. 2012. A Review of NASA Human Research Program’s Scientific Merit Processes: Letter Report. Washington: The National Academies Press. es_ES
dc.description.references National Science Board. 2001. Federal Research Resources: A Process for Setting Priorities. National Science Foundation. es_ES
dc.description.references Nicholson, Joshua M., and John P. Ioannidis. 2012. Research grants: Conform and be funded. Nature 492: 34–36. es_ES
dc.description.references Perlitz, Manfred, Thorsten Peske, and Randolf Schrank. 1999. Real options valuation: The new frontier in R&D project evaluation? R&D Management 29: 255–270. doi: 10.1111/1467-9310.00135 . es_ES
dc.description.references Porter, Theodore M. 1995. Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton: Princeton University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Portfolio Review Group. 2014. Report of the Portfolio Review Group: 2012-2013 University of California Systemwide Research Portfolio: Cycle 1 Programs Findings and Recommendations. University of California. es_ES
dc.description.references Rafols, Ismael, Alan L. Porter, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2010. Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61: 1871–1887. doi: 10.1002/asi.21368 . es_ES
dc.description.references Rafols, Ismael, Loet Leydesdorff, Alice O’Hare, Paul Nightingale, and Andy Stirling. 2012. How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management. Research Policy 41: 1262–1282. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.015 . es_ES
dc.description.references Reid, W.V., D. Chen, L. Goldfarb, H. Hackmann, Y.T. Lee, K. Mokhele, E. Ostrom, K. Raivio, H.J. Schellnhuber, and A. Whyte. 2010. Earth system science for global sustainability: Grand challenges. Science 330: 916–917. es_ES
dc.description.references Robertson, G. Philip, Vivien G. Allen, George Boody, Emery R. Boose, Nancy G. Creamer, E. Laurie, James R. Gosz, et al. 2008. Long-term Agricultural Research: A research, education, and extension imperative. BioScience 58: 640–645. es_ES
dc.description.references Røttingen, John-Arne, Sadie Regmi, Mari Eide, Alison J. Young, Roderik F. Viergever, Christine Ardal, Javier Guzman, Danny Edwards, Stephen Matlin, and Robert F. Terry. 2013. Mapping of available health research and development data: What’s there, what’s missing, and what role is there for a global observatory? Lancet 382: 1286–1307. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61046-6 . es_ES
dc.description.references Ruegg, Rosalie T. 2007. Quantitative portfolio evaluation of US federal research and development programs. Science and Public Policy 34: 723–730. doi: 10.3152/030234207X259021 . es_ES
dc.description.references Salter, Ammon J., and Ben R. Martin. 2001. The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review. Research Policy 30: 509–532. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00091-3 . es_ES
dc.description.references Sarewitz, Daniel. 1996. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology and the Politics of Progress. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Sarewitz, Daniel, and Roger A. Pielke Jr. 2007. The neglected heart of science policy: Reconciling supply of and demand for science. Environmental Science & Policy 10: 5–16. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.001 . es_ES
dc.description.references Schwenk, Charles R. 1988. The Cognitive Perspective on Strategic Decision Making. Journal of Management Studies 25: 41–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00021.x . es_ES
dc.description.references Scientific Management Review Board. 2013. Draft Report on Approaches to Assess the Value of Biomedical Research Supported by NIH. National Institutes of Health. es_ES
dc.description.references Skupin, André, Joseph R. Biberstine, and Katy Börner. 2013. Visualizing the topical structure of the medical sciences: A self-organizing map approach. PloS One 8: e58779. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058779 . es_ES
dc.description.references Smith, Richard. 1988. Peering into the bowels of the MRC. I: Setting priorities. British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.) 296: 484–488. es_ES
dc.description.references Smith, Keith. 2000. Innovation as a Systemic Phenomenon: Rethinking the Role of Policy. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1: 73–102. doi: 10.1080/146324400363536 . es_ES
dc.description.references Snellen, Ignatius Th.M. 1983. Social Merit as a Criterion of Scientific Choice: Its Application in Dutch Science Policy. Minerva 21: 16–36. es_ES
dc.description.references Souder, William E., and Tomislav Mandakovic. 1986. R&D Project Selection Models. Research Management 29: 36–42. es_ES
dc.description.references Spaapen, Jack, and Leonie van Drooge. 2011. Introducing “productive interactions” in social impact assessment. Research Evaluation 20: 211–218. doi: 10.3152/095820211X12941371876742 . es_ES
dc.description.references Sponberg, Adrienne F. 2005. Streamlining the federal water research portfolio. BioScience 55. es_ES
dc.description.references Srivastava, Christina Viola, Nathaniel Deshmukh Towery, and Brian Zuckerman. 2007. Challenges and opportunities for research portfolio analysis, management, and evaluation. Research Evaluation 16: 152–156. doi: 10.3152/095820207X236385 . es_ES
dc.description.references Stilgoe, Jack. 2014. Against excellence. The Guardian, December 19. http://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2014/dec/19/against-excellence . es_ES
dc.description.references Stirling, Andy. 2007. A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 4: 707–719. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2007.0213 . es_ES
dc.description.references Stirling, Andy, and Ian Scoones. 2009. From Risk Assessment to Knowledge Mapping: Science, Precaution, and Participation in Disease Ecology. Ecology and Society 14: 14. es_ES
dc.description.references Stummer, Christian, and Kurt Heidenberger. 2003. Interactive R&D Portfolio Analysis With Project Interdependencies and Time Profiles of Multiple Objectives. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 50(2): 175–183. es_ES
dc.description.references Swedish Presidency of the European Union. 2009. The Lund Declaration. European Union. es_ES
dc.description.references Van Bekkum, Sjoerd, Enrico Pennings, and Han Smit. 2009. A real options perspective on R&D portfolio diversification. Research Policy 38: 1150–1158. es_ES
dc.description.references Vonortas, Nicholas S., and Chintal A. Desai. 2007. “Real options” framework to assess public research investments. Science and Public Policy 34: 699–708. doi: 10.3152/030234207X259012 . es_ES
dc.description.references Waltman, Ludo, and Nees Jan van Eck. 2012. A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63: 2378–2392. es_ES
dc.description.references Waltman, Ludo, Nees Jan Van Eck, and Ed C. M. Noyons. 2009. A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks: 1–11. es_ES
dc.description.references Weinberg, Alvin M. 1963. The Criteria for Scientific Choice. Minerva 1: 159–171. es_ES
dc.description.references Woolf, Steven H. 2008. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA 299: 211–213. doi: 10.1001/jama.2007.26 . es_ES
dc.description.references Wulf, William A. 1998. Balancing the research portfolio. Science (New York, N.Y.) 281: 1803. es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem