| 1. |
- Cocos, Marta, 1988-
(författare)
-
Policy Hybridization : Continuity and Change in Swedish Research Funding
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration. - : Göteborgs universitet. - 2001-7405 .- 2001-7413. ; 24:4, s. 71-95
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper follows recent calls to focus on how policy hybridity is formed using a research policy case, an area that has undergone profound changes in the last four decades. More specifically, it focuses on the case of Swedish research funding and its major institutional reorganization in 2000. Following the argument that conflicting institutional logics often prompt institutional hybridity, the paper conceptualizes and examines the role of three institutional logics present in research policy, namely academic excellence, utility of research, and funding efficiency. Using quantitative policy document analysis, a secondary literature review, and in-depth interviews, the paper reveals that, while a heated conflict existed between the proponents of the first two logics, the third was largely undisputed and, in fact, accommodated the final policy solution. The study’s results show that hybridity choices in Sweden can be linked to a combination of negotiations between vested interests, the state’s pursuit of better management and efficiency, strategic political action, and historical path dependency. Finally, this paper proposes several implications of segregation and other hybridity choices.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cocos, Marta, 1988-, et al.
(författare)
-
What we know about research policy mix
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Science and Public Policy. - : Oxford University Press. - 0302-3427 .- 1471-5430. ; 47:2, s. 235-245
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The research policy (RP) arena has been transforming in recent years, turning into a policy mix encompassing the diversity of policy instruments embedded in, and following different policy rationales and aims. Its complexity defies attempts for complex comparative analysis and eventually, a better understanding of what kind of (mixes of) funding instruments work better than others and in which situations. In this article, we address this gap by developing a conceptual framework that allows us to build the policy mix idea into the analysis of research funding instruments (RFIs), by relying on four dimensions: policy rationales, implementation modalities, policy actors, and the funding instruments interactions. We base our work on a careful literature review, especially drawing on the work of researchers who have developed similar frameworks in other policy areas, bringing it together with that of RP scholars, capturing the issues that are key to analyzing and understanding RFIs.
|
|
