In many ways, science represents a complex system which involves technical, social, and economic aspects. An analysis of such a system requires employing and combining different methodological perspectives and incorporation of different sources of data. In this dissertation, we use a variety of methods to analyze large sets of data in order to examine the effects of various domestic and institutional factors on scientific activities. First, we evaluate how the contributions of behavioral and social sciences to studies of health have evolved over time. We use data analytics to conduct a textual analysis of more than 200,000 publications on the topic of HIV/AIDS. We find that the focus of the scientific community within the context of the same problem varies as the societal context of the problem changes. Specifically, we uncover that the focus on the behavioral and social aspects of HIV/AIDS has increased over time and varies in different countries. Further, we show that this variation is related to the mortality level that the disease causes in each country. Second, we investigate how different sources of funding affect the science enterprise differently. We use data analytics to analyze more than 60,000 papers published on the subject of specific diseases globally and highlight the role of philanthropic money in these domains. We find that philanthropies tend to have a more practical approach in health studies as compared with public funders. We further show that they are also concerned with the economic, policy related, social, and behavioral aspects of the diseases. We uncover that philanthropies tend to mix and combine approaches and contents supported both by public and private sources of funding for science. We further show that in doing so, philanthropies tend to be closer to the position held by the public sector in the context of health studies. Finally, we find that studies funded by philanthropies tend to receive higher citations, and hence have higher impact, in comparison to those funded by the public sector. Third, we study the effect of different schemes of funding distribution on the career of scientists. In this study, we develop a system dynamics model for analyzing a scientist's career under different funding and competition contexts. We investigate the characteristics of optimal strategies and also the equilibrium points for the cases of scientists competing for financial resources. We show that a policy to fund the best can lead scientists to spend more time on writing proposals, in order to secure funding, rather than writing papers. We find that when everyone receives funding (or have the same chance of receiving funding) the overall optimal payoff of the scientists reaches its highest level and at this optimum, scientists spend all their time on writing papers rather than writing proposals. Our analysis suggests that more egalitarian distributions of funding results in higher overall research output by scientists. We also find that luck plays an important role in the success of scientists. We show that following the optimal strategies do not guarantee success. Due to the stochastic nature of funding decisions, some will eventually fail. The failure is not due to scientists' faulty decisions, but rather simply due to their lack of luck. / Ph. D. / Science helps us understand the world and enables us to improve how we interact with our environment. But science itself has also been the subject of inquiry by philosophers, sociologists, economists, historians, and scientists. The goal in the investigations of science has been to better understand how scientific advances occur, how to foster innovation, and how to improve the institutions that push science forward. This dissertation contributes to this area of research by asking and responding to several questions about the science enterprise. First, we study how communities of scientists in different parts of the world look at the seemingly same problem differently. We use a computational method to read through a large set of publications on the topic of HIV/AIDS (which includes more than 200,000 papers) and uncover the topics of these papers. We find that in the context of HIV/AIDS, contributions of behavioral and social scientists have increased over time. Moreover, we show that the share of these contributions in any counties’ total research output differs significantly. We further find that there is a significant relationship between one country’s rate of death, due to HIV/AIDS, and the share of behavioral and social studies in the overall research profile of that country on the topic of HIV/AIDS. Second, we investigate how different sources of research funding affect scientific activities differently. Specifically, we focus on the role of philanthropic money in science and its effect on the content and impact of research studies. In our analysis, we rely on computational techniques that distinguishes between different themes of research in the studies of a few diseases and also different statistical methods. We find that philanthropies tend to have a more practical approach to health studies as compared with public sources of funding. Meanwhile, we find that they are also concerned with the economic, policy related, social, and behavioral aspects of the diseases. Moreover, we show that philanthropies tend to mix and combine approaches and contents supported both by public and private sources of funding for science. We find that, in doing so, philanthropies tend to be closer to the position held by the public sector in the context of health studies. Finally, we show that studies funded by philanthropies tend to receive higher citations. This finding suggests that these studies have a higher impact in comparison to those funded by the public sector. Third, we study how different mechanisms for distributing research funding among scientists can affect their career and success. Many scientists should spend time on both writing papers and research grant proposals. In this work, we aim at understanding how a scientists should allocate her time between these two activities to maximize her career long number of papers. We develop a small mathematical model to capture the mechanisms related to the research career of a scientist in an academic setting. Then, for different schemes of funding distribution, we find the scientist’s time allocation that maximizes the number of papers she publishes over her career. We find that when funding is being allocated to the best scientists and best grant proposals, scientists’ best strategy is to spend more time on writing research grant proposals rather than papers. This decreases the total number of papers published by the scientists over their career. We also find that luck is important in determining the career success of scientists. Due to errors in evaluation of proposal qualities, a scientist may fail in her career regardless of whether she has followed the best strategy that she could.

The Human Genome Project (HGP), the name given to the scientific program to map and decode all of human genetic material, has been projected to revolutionize the conduct of biological science in the twenty-first century. For several years before its formation in 1990, a federally-funded, systematic study of the human genome was discussed first in the scientific arena and then in the public arena. The central thesis of this dissertation is that the arguments supporting or rejecting creation of the HGP and the rhetorical devices used to further those arguments had a major influence on the shape the HGP took in 1991. The argumentation used both for and against the creation of the HGP before the public as well as on the border between the public and scientific arenas is studied. The rhetorical devices such as metaphor, narrative, and selective word choices used to further these arguments are also examined. In particular, a rhetorical content analysis was performed on the 1986-1991 argumentation available to the most crucial audience for such persuasion: the members of Congress who ultimately voted for or against the program's funding and its establishment as a part of U.S. science policy. The proponents of the HGP, especially after the first year of public debate, presented their arguments in a wider arena of discussion and presented more and more varied arguments to advocate the project. The opposition raised questions that had for the most part been answered earlier in the debate. Often anti-HGP arguments focused on less effective audiences (scientists instead of members of Congress). Opposition to the project didn't become organized until near the end of the time frame studied, too late to have much of an impact on the outcome of the debate. The rhetorical devices studied served to magnify the impact of arguments used: in particular, the metaphor served as a boundary object to bridge discussions between the scientific and the public arenas. Ultimately the victory in the debate over the establishment of the HGP was awarded to the promulgators of the strongest underlying metaphor--the idealized excitement and profit of exploration of unknown territory--and the benefits to come from filling in and conquering the unknown areas of the human genetic map, territory the U.S. was eager to claim for its own. / Ph. D.

In this dissertation research, I try to deepen the understanding of the logic and history behind science of science policy approaches and to substitute for this scientific evidence-based science policy model an evidence-critical and -informed model in which scientific and democratic claims are promoted simultaneously. Science of science policy, or what I call the scientizing science policy (SSP) discourse, is a strategic response of science policy community members to the following two socio-political developments: the government performance management reform movement and a new social contract of science. These two developments have motivated the science policy community to construct new science R&D management strategies that make science R&D investment more effective and economically beneficial than before. Former Presidential Science Advisor John Marburger played an important role in articulating an SSP approach at the federal level that opened up a political space for the larger SSP discourse to emerge and take hold. Other heterogeneous science policy community actors, including science agency managers and academic researchers, have also engaged and played major roles in shaping the premises, strategies, and directions that make up the SSP discourse by articulating their own approaches to SSP. The SSP discourse constitutes a series of strategies such as economizing and quantifying R&D investment decisions. In particular, to implement the ideas of performance reform and a new social contract of science in the field of science policy and management, the SSP community members have prioritized the development of data, models, and evidence related to federal R&D investment by funding studies on new scientific data, tools, and quantitative methods through the National Science Foundation (NSF) Science of Science and Innovation Policy (SciSIP) program. Interagency collaboration organized and supported by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is another key feature promoted by the SSP community. Through this research of the rise and development of the SSP discourse, I emphasize the following aspects that are relevant to both science policy practice and research community members. First, the SSP discourse demonstrates the influence of the performance reform movement on science, technology, and innovation policy and R&D management. Second, the SSP discourse has the strong potential to shift science policy makers' focus from planning and implementing to evaluating federal R&D programs. Third, the SSP discourse not only reflects, but also promotes the tendency of public policy makers, politicians, and the public to rely on scientific claims and evidence when they are engaged in discussions or policy decision making processes related to science and technology. Fourth, the SSP discourse alters the balance of authority and influence among science policy actors, including science agency managers, scientists, and executive branch offices in the decision making process on federal R&D priority and investment. Fifth, even though there are conflicts and disagreements among science policy community members on the visions and future of the NSF SciSIP program, the SSP discourse is valuable as a space in which heterogeneous science policy research and practice community members can interact, learn from each other, and collaborate to develop U.S. science, technology, and innovation policy. I conclude by proposing an evidence-critical and -informed science policy in which the SSP discourse contributes to promoting democratic values in the science policy decision process. In particular, the evidence-critical and -informed model focuses on not only using scientific data and evidence when making federal R&D decisions, but also on promoting the democratic and deliberative process in monitoring R&D activities' performance and social outcomes. In this model, I view the public as a legitimate stakeholder for evaluating federal R&D investment. This evidence-informed model can be implemented under the SSP discourse if the new R&D data, models, and tools developed by the NSF SciSIP-funded research are coupled with a new government performance website in which the public can access information about federal R&D activities as well as provide feedback about R&D investments to science policy makers. / Ph. D.

O histologista espanhol Santiago Ramón y Cajal participou do processo de restauração e institucionalização da Ciência Espanhola no final do século XIX e início do século XX. Em 1889, Ramón y Cajal demostrou à comunidade científica que o tecido nervoso é composto por células individuais, em contraposição à teoria do reticularismo vigente à época. Sua contribuição foi importante para os estudos histológicos e para a criação da área que depois viria a ser chamada Neurociência. O mérito de seu trabalho investigativo foi reconhecido com o prêmio Nobel de Fisiologia ou Medicina em 1906. Seu prestígio internacional impulsionou a investigação científica espanhola em diversas aéreas, especialmente na de Ciências da Vida, e o levou à direção da principal agência pública de fomento à pesquisa, a Junta para Ampliação dos Estudos e Investigações Científicas. Este trabalho tem o objetivo de analisar a participação e a influência de Ramón y Cajal na formulação de políticas de amparo à produção científica na Espanha, na formação de pesquisadores e no consequente avanço do conhecimento ocorrido no país no período indicado / The Spanish histologist Santiago Ramón y Cajal was a fundamental actor of the restoration and institutionalization of science in Spain in late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 1889, Ramón y Cajal demonstrated to the world scientific community that the nervous system is composed of individual cells, in contrast to the theory of reticularism in force at the time. His contribution was important to the histological studies of the brain and to the creation of what was to become neuroscience. The merit of his investigative was recognized with the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1906. His international prestige boosted many fields of Spanish science, specifically life sciences, and led him to become the director of the main public science funding agency in the country, the so called the Board for Expansion of Scientific Studies and Research. This work aims to analyze the participation and the influence of Ramón y Cajal in the formulation of policies to support the Spanish scientific production, in the training of researchers and in the consequent advancement of the knowledge in Spain in the mentioned period

Why is it that the international scientific consensus on climate change has not been followed by a proportionate policy response in Canada? Perhaps the relationships between the country’s science organizations and government agencies are not functioning properly. My research adopts an interdisciplinary approach (i.e. science studies and political science) to this issue, highlighting the relevant literature’s underlying consensus on co-production, a norm of deliberative two-way engagement between scientists and policy-makers. I hypothesize that relationships embodying elements of co-productive design (e.g. informal communication, appointed liaisons) are more likely to facilitate climate action. To test this, I examine three cases of climate science-policy partnership in Canada by interviewing participants from both sides. The partnership between the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium and BC municipalities exhibits substantial influence on policy, tied to a considerable degree of co-productive design. The partnership between the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions and the Climate Action Secretariat of the BC provincial government also displays notable design characteristics, but primarily facilitates side benefits and soft influences rather than concrete policy changes. The attempted partnership between the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences and the federal government exhibits few elements of co-productive design and has been effectively terminated, demonstrating the prerequisite importance of political interest. The relevant literature is not sufficiently nuanced to fully predict or explain these situations, so I put forward a new theoretical model. My science-policy relationship hierarchy (SPRHi) suggests that each such case can be classified as incidental interaction, basic partnership, interactive dialogue, or true co-production. It specifies the conditions which must be met for any given relationship to improve, maximizing potential benefits and influences. Concrete policy changes seem to result only from true co-production, though, which generally requires exceptional external requirements and thus cannot be deliberately facilitated. As such, co-productive design ultimately does not offer a clear way to address Canada’s climate inaction. I suggest that further research be conducted on international coordination mechanisms, public attitudes, and (especially) political leadership. However, the soft influences of science-policy partnerships may affect these broader factors in unpredictable ways, so the importance of co-productive design should not be underestimated. / Graduate

Orientadores: Sergio Luiz Monteiro Salles Filho, Sergio Medeiros Paulino de Carvalho / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Geociências / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-07T06:18:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Yamamura_Simone_M.pdf: 871039 bytes, checksum: b6d95e812c725ab95233dd7bc308c971 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 / Resumo: A produção e a comercialização de plantas transgênicas encontram-se atualmente circundadas por uma série de discussões e debates, pois envolvem a utilização da: engenharia genética para a promoção de inovações no campo científico e tecnológico e para a criação de valor econômico. Os organismos geneticamente modificados ensejam questionamentos nas áreas as mais diversas, como a ambiental, a política, a econômica, a jurídica, a social, a ética, a religiosa e a filosófica; tratá-las conjuntamente e de modo harmônico é tarefa das mais difíceis. Um dos temas que dizem respeito às plantas transgêniéas, especialmente devido à sua intrínseca relação com a pesquisa e o comércio; é o da propriedade intelectual. Os marcos regulatórios internacionais e nacionais que tratam de direitos de propriedade intelectual associados' às plantas transgênicas, bem como os marcos regulatórios que se relacionam ao seu desenvolvimento e comercialização, formam um quadro jurídico complexo e imbricado, que influencia a pesquisa e geração de negócios com transgênicos. Neste trabalho são analisados, em nível internacional, os acordos da Organização Mundial do Comércio referentes à propriedade intelectual, às ,medidas sanitárias e fitossanitárias e às barreiras técnicas ao comércio; as convenções para a proteção de obtenções vegetais; a Convenção da Diversidade Biológica; e o Protocolo, de Cartagena. Em nível nacional, são analisadas a Lei de Propriedade Industrial, a Lei de Proteção de Cultivares, a Lei de Biossegurança e a Medida Provisória de acesso ao patrimônio genético brasileiro. A partir dessas análises, são apontadas tendências para o futuro do aparato regulatório e para a pesquisa, desenvolvimento e geração de negócios com plantas transgênicas. Uma melhor compreensão de tais marcos regulatórios e.de suas implicações contribui para o aproveitamento do potencial brasileiro - o qual passa pela definição de um quadro regulatório claro e coeso, que atenda às prescrições internacionais e às necessidades nacionais, aliado a políticas de incentivo a outros elementos impulsionadores da inovação local / Abstract: Nowadays, the production and marketing of transgenic plants are involved in a series of discussions and debates, as they concern the use of genetic engineering for the promotion of innovations in the fields of science and technology and for the creation of economic value. Genetically modified organisms bring questions in various areas, such as environrnent, politics, economy, law, soc~ety, ethics, religion and philosophy; dealing with them joint1y and harmoniously is such a difficult task. One of the subjects which refer to transgenic plants, especially due to its intrinsec relation to research and commerce, is intellectual property. The international and national regulatory frameworks which tackle intellectual property rights associated to transgenic plants, as well as regulatory frameworks related to their development and.marketing, form a complex and overlapping legal scenario, which influences research and business with transgenic products. This work analyses, at international level, the agreements from the World Trade Organisation regarding intellectual property, sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade; the conventions for the protection of new varieties of plants; the Convention on Biological Diversity; and the Cartagena Protocol. At national levei, the Industrial Property Law, the Varieties' Protection Law, the Biosecurity Law and the Provisional Measure for the access to Brazilian genetic resources are analysed. From these analyses, tendencies are indicated concerning the future of regulatory frameworks: and research, development and business with transgenic plants. A better comprehension of such regulatory frameworks and of their implications contributes to the use of Brazilian potential - it encompasses the definition of a clear and coherent legal scenario, which keeps up with international prescriptions and national necessities, along with policies for the incentive of other elements essential to local innovation / Mestrado / Mestre em Política Científica e Tecnológica

This paper explores the conflicts of interest present in science policy and how claims being made for evidence based science can be used to suppress critical social science research. The specific case presented concerns the attempts to ban and censor my work criticising the economics of carbon emissions trading while I was working for the Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in Australia. The role of management and the Science Minister are documented through their own public statements. The case raises general issues about the role of epistemic communities in the production of knowledge, the potential for manipulation of information under the guise of quality control and the problems created by claiming a fact-value dichotomy in the science-policy interface. The implications go well beyond just climate change research and challenge how public policy is being formulated in modern industrial societies where scientific knowledge and corporate interests are closely intertwined. (author's abstract) / Series: SRE - Discussion Papers

L'Agence Nationale de la Recherche, créée en 2005, contribue à rapprocher le système de recherche français du modèle anglo-saxon, dans lequel les agences de financement jouent un rôle déterminant dans la conduite des politiques scientifiques. À partir d'une enquête sur l'agence et de l’étude des programmes de financement en génomique végétale et en chimie durable, cette thèse analyse le rôle de l'ANR dans la transformation du mode d'allocation des financements. Elle s’appuie sur des données issues d'entretiens auprès de chercheurs, d’un traitement statistique des projets déposés et de l'analyse de sources primaires et secondaires sur l’activité de l'ANR. Nous montrons notamment que l'ANR constitue une organisation intermédiaire partiellement autonome dont le métier a considérablement évolué depuis sa création en 2005. La carrière de l'agence témoigne des luttes de définition dont elle fait l'objet. Le gouvernement par projet pratiqué par l'ANR a contribué à généraliser la pratique des appels à projets compétitifs en France, qui favorise la différenciation des situations locales, la fragmentation des communautés de recherche et le changement du rapport des chercheurs aux financements. Plus généralement, nous montrons que la multiplication des appels à projets compétitifs conduit à établir ce que nous qualifions une économie de la recherche sur projets. Dans une telle économie, l'enjeu central pour les chercheurs devient le contrôle de la traduction des activités de recherche locales sous la forme générique de « projet » afin de mener leur activité. / The National Research Agency (ANR) created in 2005 brings the French research system closer to Anglo-saxon ones, where funding agencies play an important part in research policies. Based on an investigation of the ANR and two funding programs in plant genomics and green chemistry, this dissertation shows the significant role played by the ANR in the transformation of funding allocation in France. It contributes both to sociology of science policies and to sociology of organisations. We use data from interviews with researchers, statistical analysis of submitted projects and various reports and media contents. We show that the ANR is an intermediate and semi-autonomous organisation whose aims have significantly evolved since its creation in 2005. The definition of its missions has been a continuous object of struggles which can be seen in the « career » of the agency. Because the ANR mainly « governs through projects », its activities led to the multiplication of competitive calls for projects in France. Some of the consequences are the singularisation of local situations, the scattering of research communities and a change in how researchers behave regarding fundings. More broadly, we show that the multiplication of competitive project funding opportunities leads to an « economy of projectified research ». In this type of economy, the main issue for researchers is to control the way their research is converted into « project » in order to be funded.

No description available.

This social history of science policy development emphasizes the impact on the agricultural community of federal policies regarding release of recombinant DNA (rDNA) organisms into the environment. The history also demonstrates that the U.S. Coordinated Framework for Biotechnology Regulation (1986) is based principally in political criteria, not solidly based in science as its proponents claimed. The power struggle among policy negotiators with incompatible belief systems resulted in a political correction of biotechnology. I also demonstrate that episodes in the rDNA controversy occur in repetitive and periodic patterns. During the 1980s, the first rDNA microbial pesticide, Ice-Minus, struggled through a policy gauntlet of federal agency approval processes, a Congressional hearing, and many legal actions before it was finally released into the environment. At the height of the controversy (1984-1986), the Reagan Administration would admit no new laws or regulations to slow the development of technologies or hinder American international competitiveness. At the same time, Jeremy Rifkin, a radical activist representing a green world view, used the controversy to agitate for social and economic reform. Meanwhile, a group of Congressional aides who called themselves the "Cloneheads" used the debate to fight for more public participation in the science policy-making process. Conflicting perspectives regarding biotechnology originated, not in level of understanding of the science involved, but in personal perspectives that were outwardly expressed as political group affiliations. The direction of federal biotechnology policy was influenced most successfully by politically best-positioned individuals (what I call a "hierarchy effect") who based decisions on how biotechnology harmonized with their pre-existing beliefs. The success of their actions also depended on timing. Historical events during the rDNA controversy followed the same periodic pattern--gestation, threshold, crisis/conflict, and quasi-quiescence--through two consecutive eras--the Containment Era (1970s) and the Release Era (1980s). These periods are modeled after Fletcher's stages through which ethical issues evolve (1990). However, an agricultural perspective on the debate reveals that such stages also occur in finer detail on repeating, overlapping, and multi-level scales. Knowledge of this periodicity may be useful in predicting features of future episodes of the rDNA controversy. / Ph. D.