| 11. |
- Jonsson, Örn D., et al.
(författare)
-
Taming the elements—The use of geothermal energy in Iceland
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Geothermal Energy and Society. - : Springer. - 9783319782850 ; , s. 145-158
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Harnessing geothermal water was an unlikely way to take on a pressing problem in Iceland: substitute oil and coal in the late thirties. As a reaction to the oil crisis in the 1970s, measures were taken by national authorities to substitute unsustainable energy. The transition was a success. The space heating system was and is based on a system for extracting and distributing geothermal water which had been strengthened in the early sixties and for the most part a fully publicly financed endeavour. In the turn of the century, as a part of the surge of privatisation in the neighbouring countries and the importance of competition, measures were taken to build technologically advanced large-scale geothermal power plants which turned to be a showcase of advanced technical knowledge but a financial disaster. In recent decades the diverging understanding of geothermal water as an energy source versus the embeddedness of the varied use of geothermal water is becoming ever more apparent and a pressing policy issue. Focus on sustainability, new technological solutions, such as smart micro-grids, and increased tourism are more compatible with the varied and embedded use of geothermal water as opposed to using geothermal resources to produce energy as a part of a large-scale technological system.
|
|
| 12. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
An evolutionary model of innovation policy: Conceputalizing the growth of knowledge in innovation policy as an evolution of policy alternatives
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The DRUID 2018 Conference, Copenhagen, June 11-13 2018.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Our purpose is to propose a conceptual model of the growth of knowledge in innovation policy making. We explicitly draw upon evolutionary economics in order to conceptualize learning as an evolutionary process of the growth of knowledge about policy problems and their solutions. Our model points to the central role of the variation and selective retention of policy alternatives and contributes to the current debate about how to build capacity through mission-oriented innovation policies, to address grand social challenges.
|
|
| 13. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Developing innovation governance readiness in regenerative medicine: lessons learned from the Macchiarini crisis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Regenerative Medicine. - London : Future Medicine Ltd. - 1746-0751 .- 1746-076X. ; 16:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The generation and clinical adoption of workable therapies in regenerative medicine has been slow, despite its alleged potential to relieve suffering and improve health outcomes. This has been explained by a fundamental difference between advanced cell and gene therapies and conventional drug- and device-based therapies, raising questions about how the readiness of existing healthcare systems to adopt such therapies can be evaluated and improved. In this paper, we use the lessons learned from the Macchiarini crisis at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden to take the first step in formulating the concept of innovation governance readiness. We propose it as a tool to help evaluate and improve the ability of private, public and civil society actors to work together to build and put into practice therapies based on emerging medical technologies such as regenerative medicine.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Governance of medical research and innovation - Lessons from a recent crisis in regenerative medicine
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Third Nordic STS (Science, Technology, Society) Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 31 May - 2 June 2017.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Within the field of regenerative medicine radical steps are taken, by combining knowledge advances in engineering and medicine, in an attempt to relieve human suffering and save lives. However, such an approach is not without risks and crisis that lead to questions about its legitimacy are common, especially in prestigious and fast-moving fields (The Lancet 2014, van Hoorden 2011). A recent Swedish television documentary tells the story of the thorax surgeon Paolo Macchiarini at the Karolinska Institute and his attempts to develop a new procedure for replacing parts of the trachea by growing stem cells on both biological and synthetic scaffolds. Originally presented as a groundbreaking achievement documented in prestigious medical journals and hailed by the press, it is now seen by many as a reckless and unethical experimentation supported by research fraud. Four members of the Nobel Prize committee in Physiology or Medicine have resigned. The Vice-Chancellor of the Karolinska Institute has resigned. Police investigation is in process A former minister and head of Swedish police is investigating whether unethical research practice can be verified. At the same time The Lancet (Horton 2016) has published a comment on why they have not retracted his article. While the Maccchiarini crisis is not unique it raises many interesting questions about the governance of medical research and innovation in general, and regenerative medicine in particular. The purpose of this paper is to identify and conceptualize the governance challenges related to major advances in medical research and innovation. Based on a previous conceptual model to explain technological collaboration (McKelvey et al 2015), this paper uses the case of regenerative medicine and of the crisis surrounding Macchiarini and the Karolinska Institute to identify three challenges facing policy makers and researchers. This paper is framed through theories of the specific site of medicine as an area for innovation. Recent research on medical innovation has focused on explaining how and why medical innovation emerges through heterogeneous and dispersed actors, such as hospitals, firms and universities, interacting through sequences of problem-finding, and problem-solving, processes (Metcalfe et al 2005). In this research special attention has been given to the role of clinical practice and its mutual interaction with biomedical science, but at the same time noting the role of the physician in mobilizing and guiding industrial innovation (Blume 1992, Hopkins 2006). In this particular setting, we then apply and develop theories of governance and co-evolution of knowledge in medicine to describe the system challenges (McKelvey et al 2015). Our conceptual model of the governance of technological collaboration recognizes that different types of organizations are involved in the production and use of knowledge, where each has a different set of incentives and networks. However, the governance requires the development of common norms and institutions for the collective action. In other words, the collective action is mediated by interacting, where common norms and institutions are developed that regulate behavior and help create a common good. The challenges that we identify and will describe in this case are: Firstly, role of research funding, especially the concentration of funding into strategic areas. The hiring of an internationally acclaimed researcher, Macchiarini, coincides with a strategic investment in regenerative medicine by the Karolinska Institute supported by large government grants for research excellence in selected fields. High concentration of research funds, strong pressures for success, and global competition for talent put strains on existing systems of governance of research and innovation for which it was not designed. Secondly, the specific nature of interface between medical research and practice. The close connection between research and practice is commonly believed to be one of the strength of medical innovation. In many cases university departments and university hospitals employ the same people, which means they are involved both in research and practice. However, there are different rules within medical research and clinical practice in terms of experimentation. How should procedures, and knowledge, by transferred from research to practice and how should the results transferred back to research? Furthermore, these issues play out in a larger context, which involves development of stem cell technology and intellectual property rights to commercialize the technology. Thirdly, the emergence of medical innovations also leads to systemic problems due to the rapid development of knowledge. Due to their evolutionary nature medical knowledge and innovations may give rise to irreducible systems based on how bottlenecks direct the focus of attention in order to solve critical problems. Furthermore, as the search for new medical knowledge has a strong ethical dimension, is sought for the common good, and to a large degree funded by public funds, oversight is required for what bottlenecks should be attended to and how. This oversight is proved by a governance regime, which includes both formal and informal elements. Given the nature of the current discussion about the Macchiarini crisis the most likely response is to strengthen the oversight and regulation, including monitoring, related to the interface between medical research and practice. The focus will be on universities and hospitals without consideration of other actors involved in the production and use of medical knowledge. We argue, based on our conceptual model, that this may have the adverse effects of introducing bottlenecks in the system. The main challenge for policy makers and researchers is to understand what actors are involved in the system, at regional, national and international levels, and how best to interact in order to create mechanisms of self-regulation that benefit each type of actor and the system as a whole.
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Negative Unintended Consequences as a Counterbalance to Innovation: The Macchiarini case as innovation governance at the interface between scientific research and clinical practice
- 2020
-
Ingår i: GEOINNO2020 Conference Proceedings, 5th Annual Geography of Innovation Conference 29-31 Jan 2020 Stavanger. - Stavanger, Norway : University of Stavanger.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Innovation processes – as well as scientific research and technological development – rely upon a continuous process of generating new knowledge, arising from collaboration across a variety of private actors like firms, societal actors like universities, NGOs and professional societies, as well as public actors like government agencies (Fagerberg and Mowery, 2006). Developing new areas of scientific research will help society in the long run, but equally important are the uses of that knowledge in order to implement ideas, translate research into practise, and more generally, find ways of societal impact. Hence, the positive outcomes of these innovation processes benefit society in the long-run through new products, services, and organizational forms. Therefore, public policy to stimulate science, technology and innovation is usually designed to stimulate novelty, due to the potential future benefits for society (Edler and Fagerberg 2017). This view stresses the positive side of innovation. But in recent years, a number of studies have focused upon the negative consequences, risks or “dark side of innovation” (Nightingale 2004; Stirling 2017), whereby increasing public concerns about risks have led to demands for more inclusive and transparent innovation processes (Stilgoe et al 2013). Our three-year qualitative study analyses processes of innovation governance, within an empirical context of negative unintended consequences, namely scientific misconduct, in the specific setting at the interface between biomedical scientific research and clinical practice.
|
|
| 20. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Organizational Routines and the Growth of Knowledge in Engineering: Evolving modes of academic engagement in biomedical engineering at Chalmers University of Technology 1948-2018
- 2020
-
Ingår i: GEOINNO2020 Conference Proceedings, 5th Annual Geography of Innovation Conference 29-31 Jan 2020 Stavanger. - Stavanger, Norway : University of Stavanger.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper further develops the concept of organizational routines in the context of universities. We do so in order to propose an explicitly evolutionary economics approach to conceptualizing changes in academic engagement with industry and society over time. Within the extensive literature on university-industry interactions, the literature on academic engagement focuses upon the variety of knowledge networks between university and industry for societal impact, and contrasts that with the commercialization of university research results through patents and start-up companies. We have an empirical focus upon the changing micro-level of activities in the university, to further conceptualize what routines are, and how are related to the overall growth of knowledge. Biomedical engineering is relevant to study, because different fields of knowledge must be combined and re-combined to solve new problems and offer new solutions to existing problems. For medical innovation, hospitals are important as well as industrial firms. Drawing on a longitudinal study of biomedical engineering at one university over seven decades, we identify four distinct modes of academic engagement. We propose to conceptualize these modes of academic engagement as composed of sets of distinct routines. In particular, we have identified routines related to interactions with hospitals, both directly and through industrial firms, involving graduate students and their supervisors.
|
|
