scholarly journals Who benefits from ex ante societal impact evaluation in the European funding arena? A cross-country comparison of societal impact capacity in the social sciences and humanities

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan P L de Jong ◽  
Reetta Muhonen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
High Performing ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Evaluation Procedures ◽  
Societal Challenges ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Increasingly, research funders include societal impact as a criterion in evaluation procedures. The European Commission is no exception to this trend. Societal impact determines one-third of a project’s success in receiving funding from the Societal Challenges in Horizon 2020 (H2020). Yet, there are large differences in terms of science and technology performance between countries that participate in the programme. In this article, we (1) compare societal impact practices in the social sciences and humanities in high-performing countries (HPCs) and low-performing countries (LPCs) to the evaluation of societal impact in funding procedures at the European level and (2) reflect upon consequences for the competition for research funding in the European funding arena. To this end, we introduce the concept of ‘societal impact capacity’ as well as a framework to analyse it. The analysis of 60 case studies from 16 countries across Europe shows that (1) researchers from HPCs have a higher impact capacity than those from LPCs and (2) researchers from HPCs report more details about impact than those from LPCs. This suggests that researchers from HPCs are better equipped to score well on the impact criterion when applying for funding than researchers from LPCs. We conclude with policy recommendations for the organization and evaluation of societal impact.

Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities—A literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Budtz Pedersen ◽  
Jonas Følsgaard Grønvad ◽  
Rolf Hvidtfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This article explores the current literature on ‘research impact’ in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). By providing a comprehensive review of available literature, drawing on national and international experiences, we take a systematic look at the impact agenda within SSH. The primary objective of this article is to examine key methodological components used to assess research impact comparing the advantages and disadvantages of each method. The study finds that research impact is a highly complex and contested concept in the SSH literature. Drawing on the strong methodological pluralism emerging in the literature, we conclude that there is considerable room for researchers, universities, and funding agencies to establish impact assessment tools directed towards specific missions while avoiding catch-all indicators and universal metrics.

scholarly journals Exploração colaborativa através do compartilhamento de dados de citações do Google Scholar │ Collaborative exploration on citation data sharing in Google Scholar

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiago Rodrigo Marçal Murakami ◽  
Sibele Fausto ◽  
Ronaldo Ferreira de Araújo
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Scientific Collaboration ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Citation Data ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Collaborative Exploration ◽  
The Impact

RESUMO A falta de indexação dos títulos de revistas científicas de Ciências Humanas e Sociais em bases de dados comerciais restringe a investigação sobre seu impacto. O Acesso Aberto, ferramentas como o Google Scholar (GS) e aplicativos de processamento de dados permitem a busca e a recuperação de citações de artigos, sinalizando uma alternativa para os estudos sobre o impacto da produção científica publicada nessas áreas. Este estudo apresenta um projeto piloto de compartilhamento de dados de citações de periódicos para a investigação colaborativa por parte da comunidade de cientometria brasileira com o objetivo de incentivar uma maior utilização do GS para fins bibliométricos.Palavras-chave: Dados de Citação; Google Acadêmico; Periódicos Científicos; Colaboração.ABSTRACT The lack of indexing for titles of scientific journals in the Social Sciences and Humanities in commercial databases makes it difficult to carry out an investigation on their impact. Open Access and tools such as Google Scholar (GS) and software for data processing allow search and the recovery of article citations, which can be regarded as an alternative for the studies on the impact of scientific production published in these areas. This study presents a pilot project for sharing citation data from Brazilian journals for further collaborative research by the national scientometrics community with the aim of encouraging greater use of GS for bibliometric purposes.Keywords: Citation Data; Google Scholar; Sharing; Journals; Scientific Collaboration.

scholarly journals Worlding the Social Sciences and Humanities

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo D’haen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
World Literature ◽  
Economic Conditions ◽  
Research Knowledge ◽  
The West ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Study And Teaching ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Political Decisions

Under the impact of globalization, the study and teaching of the social sciences and humanities is rapidly changing. In many ways, what we see is a growing transfer of research, knowledge, and method from the West to other parts of the world, and in the first instance China. This development is steered by far-reaching changes in the organization of higher education in both the West and in this case China, changes that in themselves have to do with changing economic conditions, and the political decisions following from them, as the result of globalization. In the final part of this article I focus upon how this works out in one particular field or discipline in the humanities: world literature.1

Towards measuring societal impact of research: Insights from an Irish case study

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Finbarr Brereton ◽  
Eoin O'Neill ◽  
Louise Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Funding Agency ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
The Social

Academic research is increasingly required to demonstrate economic and policy relevance, with this becoming a key metric by which the success of research projects are being judged. Furthermore, the active, as opposed to passive, participation of citizens in science is now encouraged through dissemination and outreach, using, for example, co-production techniques. These non-traditional academic impacts have become a key component of a number of funding agency calls, most notably the European Union’s research funding programme Horizon 2020. However, exactly how measurable these ‘impacts’ are, particularly social and policy impacts, is unclear as there is not an obvious metric. Additionally, there is no standardised approach to assessing research impact recognised in the social sciences. Using a case study which describes the experience of using public engagement seminars as a means to disseminate academic research to stakeholder communities, this article aims to develop an impact assessment strategy to measure societal impact applicable in the social sciences. Based on recommendations in the UK Research Excellence Framework, amongst other literature, we put forward three steps to better capture research ‘impact’ in a more meaningful way in future research projects: (i) establish the quality of the academic research, (ii) choose appropriate discipline-specific criteria for measuring societal impact and (iii) choose appropriate measurable indicators. Other useful insights include the difficulty of motivating public interest in topics that are no longer high profile or emotive, and hence the necessity to provide access to research findings as early as possible in the research cycle. The article concludes with a discussion of the difficulties of measuring ‘impact’ in a meaningful sense.

scholarly journals Dialnet Métricas como herramienta de evaluación bibliométrica: aportes al análisis de la actividad científica en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orlando Gregorio-Chaviano ◽  
Rafael Repiso ◽  
Antonio Calderón-Rehecho ◽  
Joaquín León-Marín ◽  
Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wide Debate ◽  
Eugene Garfield ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
The Impact

Within the current panorama of science evaluation, the limitations of citation indexes to study the social sciences and humanities have been the subject of wide debate. To resolve this situation, different products have been created for use in national contexts, since they cover certain aspects not contained in more international indices. An example is the In-RECS family, where an indicator such as the impact factor of Eugene Garfield is defined, but its contribution lies in the ability to evaluate research in Spain by obtaining citation indicators. This paper thus highlights the need to create new products for research evaluation in general, but particularly in the social sciences and humanities. The context in which different alternatives arise and are developed to evaluate existing journals is presented, along with Dialnet Metrics, a citation index developed by the Dialnet Foundation in collaboration with the EC3 Group and dozens of Spanish universities. Based on an analysis of the citations of source journals from different subject areas, Dialnet Metrics provides indicators to evaluate the research impact at different levels. This bibliometric product enables contextualized analysis at the micro (researchers), meso (journals), and macro (areas and universities) levels. Finally, the content, data volumes, and structure of this citation index are described quantitatively. Resumen Dentro del panorama actual de evaluación de la ciencia, las limitaciones de los índices de citación para estudiar las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades han sido motivo de amplio debate. Para resolver esta situación, se han creado distintos productos para ser usados en contextos nacionales, dado que cubren ciertos aspectos no presentes en los índices de carácter más internacional. Como ejemplo se encuentran los de la familia In-RECS, donde se define un indicador similar al factor de impacto de Eugene Garfield, pero su aporte radica en la capacidad de evaluar la investigación en España mediante la obtención de indicadores de citas. Es por ello por lo que en este trabajo se expone la necesidad de crear nuevos productos para la evaluación de la investigación en general, pero particularizando en las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades. Se muestra el contexto en el que surgen y se desarrollan las distintas alternativas de evaluación de revistas existentes y se presenta Dialnet Métricas. Este es un índice de citación realizado por la Fundación Dialnet en colaboración con el Grupo EC3 y decenas de universidades españolas. A partir del análisis de las referencias citadas de revistas fuente de distintos campos temáticos, Dialnet Métricas proporciona indicadores para evaluar el impacto de la investigación a varios niveles. Este producto bibliométrico posibilita el análisis contextualizado a nivel micro (investigadores), meso (revistas) y macro (áreas y universidades). Por último, se describen cuantitativamente los contenidos, volúmenes de datos y estructura de este índice de citas. Palabras clave

scholarly journals The Swedish Platform for Sustainable Work inHorizon2020: in retrospect

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-66
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Lagerlöf ◽  
Maria Albin
Keyword(s):  
Working Life ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Major Influence ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Societal Challenges ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Partners ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The nationwide Swedish advocacy platform “Sustainable work as a resource for health, innovation and growth” started in 2013 with the aims of i) identifying possible openings for the research area within Horizon 2020, ii) implementing a strategy to impact Horizon2020, and iii) to connect Swedish and European researchers.   The basis for this agenda was that although work and working conditions have a major influence on the health, wellbeing and prosperity, these aspects were lacking or extremely fragmented in Horizon2020. Since this is a strong research area in Sweden and seen as strategically important by the Social partners, it should be a Swedish priority for Horizon2020.  The initiative was funded by Vinnova, co-funded by the participating universities, and supported by the Social partners and other stakeholders.   The platform has extended the dialogue on the European research agenda within the Swedish research community, and gradually built a strategy to impact H2020. Over the years, our advocacy has also developed in interaction with the EU Agencies Eurofound and EU-OSHA, and with PEROSH. The focus has been on the pillars of Leadership and Societal Challenges (Horizon2020). The impact on the early Calls in Horizon2020 was minor, while work and working life is much more visible in the later calls, and on the agenda in the drafts for Horizon Europe (FP9). The focus will now be on making the opportunities known to Swedish researchers, and on facilitating participation in applications.  

scholarly journals Co-creation as an innovative setting to improve the uptake of scientific knowledge: overcoming obstacles, understanding considerations and applying enablers to improve scientific impact in society

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Stier ◽  
S. E. Smit
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Quadruple Helix ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Scientific Impact ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Scientific Results

AbstractImpact-driven research is a EU priority and, increasingly, for universities around Europe. Still, there is need for specific strategies to improve the societal impact of scientific knowledge and therewith improve the uptake of scientific results. Co-creation deeply evolves the role of scientific knowledge and increases its impact. Albeit there is much research on the conceptualization and contextualization of co-creation, research on the microlevel dynamics of co-creation is less common. This article aims to understand the dynamics of and clarify the role of co-creation within and between quadruple helix actors (academia, government, industry and societal partners). Here, co-creation refers to the collaboration, where such actors actively join forces to address challenges. This paper revolves around insights from the European Commission Horizon 2020-project—Accomplissh (www.accomplissh.eu) which stands for “Accelerate co-creation by setting up a multi-actor platform for impact from Social Sciences and Humanities”. The results lay bare a set of obstacles, areas of consideration and enablers in co-creation. This said, it is argued that scientific knowledge is optimally utilized when a set of guidelines or recommendations are followed and carried out by all involved actors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document