Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research and innovation futures: challenging the dominant innovation paradigm

Die Zukunft von Forschung und Innovation: abseits etablierter Innovationsparadigmen

  • Originalarbeit
  • Published:
e & i Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While new ways of doing research and innovation such as open science, Science 2.0, open innovation, user innovation or crowdsourcing have been intensively discussed in the past few years, little systematic analysis and exploration of their wider positive, but also negative effects for economy, society and environment has been conducted. Based on the findings from three European foresight projects we discuss critical aspects of changing research and innovation patterns and their challenges for innovation policy and management.

Zusammenfassung

Neue Innovationsmodelle wie Open Innovation, Science 2.0, User Innovation und Crowdsourcing haben in den letzten Jahren große Aufmerksamkeit in Theorie und Praxis gewonnen. Bislang gab es jedoch wenige Studien, die systematisch die unterschiedlichen positiven wie auch möglichen negativen Effekte auf Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft und Umwelt untersuchen. Auf Basis der Ergebnisse von drei europäischen Foresight-Projekten werden kritische Aspekte der sich fundamental ändernden Forschungs- und Innovationsprozesse diskutiert und Herausforderungen für die Innovationspolitik und das Management von Innovation illustriert.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See https://cordis.europa.eu/docs/results/289058/final1-rif-final-report-full-report-140129-final-version-short.pdf (grant no. 289058).

  2. See http://innovation-futures.org (grant no. 225229).

  3. See http://eravisions.archiv.zsi.at/index.html (grant no. 2907059).

  4. RIF Stocktaking Report [20] and INFU Collection of Weak Signals [15].

  5. Based on Erdmann and Schirrmeister [6].

References

  1. Braungart, M., McDonough, W. (2006): Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things.

  2. Burgelman, J.-C., Osimo, D., Bogdanowicz, M. (2010). Science 2.0 (change will happen …), First Monday, 15(7).

  3. Chesbrough, H. (2003): Open innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. De Jong, J., Vanhaverbeke, W., Kalvet, T., Chesbrough, H. (2008): Policies for open innovation: theory, framework and cases. Research project funded by VISION Era-Net, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  5. EC (2007): Taking European knowledge society seriously. Report of the expert group on science and governance to the science. Brussels: Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Erdmann, L., Schirrmeister, E. (2016): Constructing transformative scenarios for research and innovation futures. Foresight, 18(3), 238–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Florida, R. (2002): The rise of the creative class: and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Francisco, S. (2010): The innovation paradox: how innovation products threaten the innovation process. Reconstruct.: Stud. Contemp. Culture, 10, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Georghiou, L., Cassingena Harper, J., Keenan, M., Miles, I., Popper, R. (Eds.) (2008): The handbook of technology foresight. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Godet, M. (1991): From anticipation to action. A handbook of strategic prospective. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Henkel, J., von Hippel, E. (2005): Welfare implications of user innovation. J. Technol. Transf., 301/2, 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hiltunen, E. (2008): The future sign and its three dimensions. Futures, 40(3), 247–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Howaldt, J., et al. (2018): Atlas of social innovation. SI-DRIVE project, centre for social research, University of Technology Dortmund.

  14. Howe, J. (2006): The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired Mag., 14, 6. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html. Accessed May 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jégou, F., Leitner, K.-H., Mahn, J., Rhomberg, W., von Saldern, S., et al. (2010): Structured collection of current signals for arising changes in innovation patterns. Deliverable 1.1 of the INFU project, Vienna.

  16. Koivisto, R., Wessberg, N., Eerola, A., Ahlqvist, T., Kivisaari, S., Myllyoja, J., Halonen, M. (2009): Integrating FTA and risk assessment methodologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 76, 1163–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Latour, B. (2005): Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Partha, D., David, P. (1994): Toward a new economics of science. Res. Policy, 23(5), 487–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ronis, S. R. (2007): Timelines into the future: strategic visioning methods for government, business, and other organisations. United States: Hamilton Books.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schaper-Rinkel, P. (2013): Exploring the future of research. Trends and drivers in doing and governing research. RIF research report AIT, Vienna.

  21. Schot, J., Steinmueller, W. E. (2018): Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Res. Policy, 47(9), 1554–1567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sveiby, K-E., Gripenberg, P., Segercrantz, B. (Eds.) (2012): Challenging the innovation paradigm, routledge studies in technology, work and organisations, Routledge.

  23. Stirling, A. (2005): Opening up or closing down: analysis, participation and power in the social appraisal of technology. In M. Leach, I. Scoones, B. Wynne (Eds.), Science and citizens: globalization and the challenge of engagement, London, Zed (pp. 218–231).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Szkuta, K., Osimo, D. (2016): Rebooting science? Implications of science 2.0 main trends for scientific method and research institutions. Foresight, 18(3), 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. The Royal Society (2011): Knowledge, networks and nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century London. The Royal Society.

  26. Tijssen, R. J. W., Waltman, L., et al. (2012): Research collaboration and the expanding science grid: measuring globalization processes worldwide. arXiv:1203.4194.

  27. Tuomi, I. (2002): Networks of innovation: change and meaning in the age of the Internet. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Virilio, P. (1990): Rasender stillstand. Germany: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  29. von Hippel, E. (2005): Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Warnke, P., Schirrmeister, E., Leitner, K-H. (2010): Innovation futures scripts. Nodes of change in innovation patterns emerging from the explorative dialogue on the 19 INFU visions. Deliverable D 3.1 of the INFU project, Vienna.

  31. Weber, M., Schaper-Rinkel, P. (2018): Unsere Fähigkeit, sich unser zukünftiges gesellschaftliches Leben vorzustellen, ist begrenzt/Our ability to imagine our social life in the future is limited, Interview. In H. Androsch, W. Knoll, A. Plimon (Eds.), Technologie im Gespräch 2018. Künstliche Intelligenz/Discussing Technology 2018: Artificial Intelligence (pp. 18–35). Wien: Holzhausen.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Innovations Systems and Policy, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Giefinggasse 4, 1210, Vienna, Austria

    Karl-Heinz Leitner & K. Matthias Weber

Authors
  1. Karl-Heinz Leitner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Matthias Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karl-Heinz Leitner.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leitner, KH., Weber, K.M. Research and innovation futures: challenging the dominant innovation paradigm. Elektrotech. Inftech. 136, 226–233 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00502-019-0728-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00502-019-0728-6

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation