Abstract
Here we present the framework of a new approach to assessing the capacity of research programs to achieve social goals. Research evaluation has made great strides in addressing questions of scientific and economic impacts. It has largely avoided, however, a more important challenge: assessing (prospectively or retrospectively) the impacts of a given research endeavor on the non-scientific, non-economic goals—what we here term “public values”—that often are the core public rationale for the endeavor. Research programs are typically justified in terms of their capacity to achieve public values, and that articulation of public values is pervasive in science policy-making. We outline the elements of a case-based approach to “public value mapping” of science policy, with a particular focus on developing useful criteria and methods for assessing “public value failure,” with an intent to provide an alternative to “market failure” thinking that has been so powerful in science policy-making. So long as research evaluation avoids the problem of public values, science policy decision makers will have little help from social science in making choices among competing paths to desired social outcomes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A distinction should be made between public opinion and public values: Whereas public opinion is highly volatile, both in its concerns and its directions, public values are much more stable. New public values may enter and old ones may exit but generally only after great social change and the passing of generations.
By “research assessment,” not our focus in this paper, we mean an investigation with similar objectives but not necessarily including data and perhaps premised on indicators but with no formal analysis.
During the history of modern science and technology policy and research evaluation, the most prominent approach to assessment has been peer review. While recognizing that peer review is crucially important, the present study focuses on systematic and potentially quantitative or mixed-method approaches and, thus, does not discuss peer review approaches to research evaluation. Similarly, this paper does not deal with the many and increasingly useful bibliometic approaches to research evaluation.
Several publications provide synoptic reviews of the history and methods of research evaluation in European nations; see, for example, Luukkonen (2002); Callon, Laredo and Mustar (1997).
References
Adams, Guy B. 1992. Enthralled with Modernity: The Historical Context of Knowledge and Theory Development in Public Administration. Public Administration Review 52(4): 363–373.
Adams, John. 2006. The Failure of Seat-Belt Legislation. In Clumsy Solutions for a Complex World, eds. M. Verweij, and M. Thompson, 132–154. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 1993. Value in ethics and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Andrews, Frank M. 1979. Scientific productivity, the effectiveness of research groups in six countries. Ann Arbor, MI.: University of Michigan Press.
Auditor General. 1993. Program Evaluation in the Federal Government. Treasury Board of Canada: The Case for Program Evaluation.
Audretsch, David B., Barry Bozeman, Kathryn Combs, Maryanne Feldman, Albert Link, Donald Siegel, Paula Stephan, Gregory Tassey, and Charles Wessner. 2002. The Economics of Science and Technology. Journal of Technology Transfer 27(2): 155–203.
Barbarie, Alain. 1993. Evaluating Federal R&D in Canada. In Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, eds. Barry Bozeman, and Julia Melkers, 155–162. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. 1991. Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems. Journal of Politics 53(4): 1044–1074.
Bozeman, Barry. 2007. Public Values and Public Interest: Counter-balancing Economic Individualism. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Bozeman, Barry. 2002. Public Value Failure and Market Failure. Lead Article, Public Administration Review 62(2): 145–161.
Bozeman, Barry 2003. Public Value Mapping of Science Outcomes: Theory and Method. In D. Sarewitz, et. al. Knowledge Flows & Knowledge Collectives: Understanding the Role of Science & Technology Policies in Development. 2 (1).
Bozeman, Barry, James Dietz, and Monica Gaughan. 2001. Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management 22(7/8): 716–740.
Bozeman, Barry, and Julia Melkers (eds.). 1993. Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice. Boston: Kluwer.
Bozeman, Barry, and Juan R. Rogers. 2002. A Churn Model of Scientific Knowledge Value: Internet Researchers as a Knowledge Value Collective. Research Policy 31(5): 769–794.
Bozeman, Barry, and Daniel Sarewitz. 2005. Public Values and Public Failure in U.S. Science Policy. Science and Public Policy 32(2): 119–136.
Braybrooke, David, and Charles E. Lindblom. 1963. A Strategy of Decision: Policy Evaluation as a Social Process. New York: Free Press.
Budd, John, and Lynn Connaway. 1997. University Faculty and Networked Information: Results of a Survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48(9): 843–852.
Cummings, Ronald, and Laura Taylor. 1999. Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method. American Economic Review 89(3): 649–665.
Feeney, Mary, and Barry Bozeman. 2007. The 2004–2005 Influenza Episode as a Case of Public Failure. Journal of Public Integrity 9(2): 179–195.
Fischer, Ernest Peter. 1997. Beauty and the Beast: The Aesthetic Moment in Science. trans. Elizabeth Oehlkers. New York: Plenum Trade.
Fisher, Erik, Catherine Slade, Derrick Anderson and Barry Bozeman. 2010. The Public Value of Nanotechnology? Scientometrics 85(1):29–39.
Freeman, Christopher. 1992. The Economics of Hope: Essays on Technical Change, Economic Growth and the Environment, London: Pinter Publishers, 1992. London: Thompson Learning.
Garrison, Jim. 2000. Pragmatism and Public Administration. Administration and Society 32(4): 458–478.
Gaus, Gerald F. 1990. Value and Justification: The Foundations of Liberal Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, Harry G. 1965. Federal Support of Basic Research: Some Economic Issues. Minerva 3(4): 500–514.
Jones, Charles I., and John C. Williams. 1998. Measuring the Social Return to R&D. Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(4): 1119–1135.
Kevles, Daniel. 1995. The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kostoff, Ronald. 2001. The Metrics of Science and Technology. Scientometrics 50(2): 353–361.
Holdren, John P. 2009. Science and Technology Policy in the Obama Administration, Remarks for the Business Higher Education Forum, Washington, D.C., 16 June (Powerpoint presentation).
Kirlin, John. 1996. What Government Must Do Well: Creating Value for Society. Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research 6(1): 161–185.
Leslie, Stuart W. 1993. The Cold War and American Science. New York: Columbia University Press.
Link, Albert N. 1996a. Economic Performance Measures for Evaluating Government Sponsored Research. Scientometrics 36(3): 325–342.
Link, Albert N. 1996b. Evaluating Public Sector Research & Development. New York: Greenwood.
Luukkonen, Terttu. 2002. Research evaluation in Europe: state of the art, 11 (2): 81-84.
Luukkonen-Gronow, Terttu. 2007. Scientific Research Evaluation: A Review of Methods and Various Contexts of their Application. R&D Management 17(3): 207–221.
Machlup, Fritz. 1962. The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Marburger, John. 2005. Speech at the 30th Annual AAAS Forum on Science and Technology Policy in Washington, D.C. (April 21), available at: http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2005/0421marburgerText.shtml.
Marmolo, Elisabetta. 1999. A Constitutional Theory of Public Goods. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 38(1): 27–42.
Martens, Karel. 2009. Equity Concerns and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Opening the Black Box. Washington, DC.: Transportation Research Board, Paper #09-0586.
Nye, Joseph. 1997. In Government We Don’t Trust. Foreign Policy 108(2): 99–111.
OECD. 1997. The Evaluation of Scientific Research: selected experiences. Paris: OECD, Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy. Document OECD/GD(97)194. http://www.oecd.org/dsti/sti/s_t/scs/prod/e_97-194.htm.
OECD. In press. Enhancing Public Research Performance through Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Priority Setting. Paris: OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry.
Polanyi, Michael. 1962. The Republic of Science: It’s Political and Economic Theory. Minerva 1(1): 54–73.
Rubenstein, Albert. 1976. Effectiveness of Federal Civilian-Oriented R&D Programs. Policy Studies Journal 5(2): 217–227.
Rosenberg, Nathan. 1982. How Exogenous is Science? In Inside the Black Box (NY: Cambridge University Press), p. 141–159.
Ruegg, Rosalie. 1996. “Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of the Advanced Technology Program,” NIST Internal Report 5896.
Ruttan, Vernon. 2006. Is War Necessary for Economic Growth? New York: Oxford University Press.
Salasin, John, Lowell Hattery, and Ramsey Thomas. 1980. The Evaluation of Federal Research Programs, MITRE Technical Report MTR-80W123, June 1980.
Sarewitz, Daniel. 1996. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology, and the Politics of Progress. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Shields, Patricia M. 1996. Pragmatism: Exploring Public Administration’s Policy Imprint. Administration and Society 28(3): 390–411.
Shils, Edward. 1968. Introduction. In Criteria for Scientific Development: Public Policy and National Goals, ed. E. Shils. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, p. iv–v.
Solow, Robert M. 1957. Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics 39(3): 312–320.
Toulmin, Stephen. 1964. The Complexity of Scientific Choice: A Stocktaking. Minerva 2(3): 343–359.
Van Deth, Jan W., and Elinor Scarbrough. 1995. The Impact of Values. Oxford: Oxford University.
Van Houten, Therese, and Harry Hatry. 1987. How to Conduct a Citizen Survey. Washington, D.C.: American Planning Association.
Weinberg, Alvin. 1963. Criteria for Scientific Choice. Minerva 1(2): 159–171.
Woodhouse, Edward, and Daniel Sarewitz. 2007. Science Policies for Reducing Societal Inequities. Science and Public Policy 34(2): 139–150.
Ziman, John. 1968. Public Knowledge: The Social Dimensions of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the support of the U.S. National Science Foundation’s “Science of Science Policy” program (award number 0738203, Arizona State University, “Public Value Mapping: Developing a Non-Economic Model of the Social Value of Science and Innovation Policy”). We are grateful for the assistance and ideas of the members of the “Public Value Mapping” project, including: Catherine Slade, Ryan Meyer, Erik Fisher, Genevieve Maricle, Walter Valdivia, Nathaniel Logar, Stephanie Moulton, Cynthia Schwartz, and David Guston.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bozeman, B., Sarewitz, D. Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation. Minerva 49, 1–23 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7