Parallel session 5 - Wednesday 21 September 2016

1. INNOVATION AND PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE:
Possibility of new indicators for the analysis of public
attitudes to science, technology and innovation
Iván G. Peyré Tartaruga Fundação de Economia e Estatística (FEE)
Rosmari T. Cazarotto Centro Universitario UNIVATES
Clitia H. Backx Martins Fundação de Economia e Estatística (FEE)
Ana Fukui Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS)
State of Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil)
Corresponding author: Iván G. Peyré Tartaruga. E-mail adress ivan@fee.tche.br
III OECD Blue Sky Forum on Science and Innovation Indicators
Ghent (Belgium), 19-21 September 2016

2. PRESENTATION
New indicators for the analysis of public attitudes to science, technology
and innovation
1 – Importance of science for the innovation process
2 – New challenges for understanding the innovation processes
3 – Public understanding of science: possibilities to study innovation
4 – A proposal of new science and innovation indicators: public
attitudes to innovate
5 – Conclusion

3. Problem:
 Methodological manuals to qualify and standardize research and
innovation data, almost exclusively, have focused on the supply
side of invention and innovation, in which attention is given to
organizations practicing research and development (R&D) and
innovative companies and virtually none to the end users, like
consumers, organizations not connected to R&D or innovation, or
countries (GODIN, 2011, 2012).
1. Introduction

4. Figure 1 – Quadrant model of scientific research
(STOKES, 2005, p. 118).
2. Importance of science for the innovation process

5. Figure 2 – Revised dynamic model (STOKES, 2005, p. 138).
2. Importance of science for the innovation process (cont.)

6. 3. New challenges for understanding the innovation processes
 Innovation as a collective process and, therefore, dependent on its social
and spatial contexts
 Some approaches to innovation studies:
1. User-side view of innovation
 users as adopters of new products or services
 also as active playeres in the creation of innovations
2. Open innovation
 attention in the academic and corporate environments in many
countries
 many sources of knowledge in and outside the company

7. 3. New challenges for understanding the innovation processes
 Some approaches to innovation studies: (cont.)
3. Triple helix
 interaction between university, companies and government
 related to civil society (fourth helix)
4. Innovation and territory
 innovation is a cumulative and cooperative activity
 dependent on historical trajectories (path dependence) and social
and territorial contexts

8. 3. New challenges for understanding the innovation processes (cont.)
 An essential element linked to innovations is their acceptance or
practical receptivity by society
 values, preferences, creeds, rules and conventions

9. 4. Public understanding of science (PUS): possibilities to study innovation
 To get data to support the development of ways to understand
connections between science and society
 To know public’s:
 Science literacy
 Interest
 Attitudes
 Engagement with science

10. 4. Public understanding of science (PUS): possibilities to study innovation
(cont.)
National and regional representative surveys of PUS
 Several science indicator surveys worldwide
 Since 1950s
 USA, UK, France, EU,…
 Latin America and Brazil
 Ministry of Science and Technology (Brazil)
 1987, 2006, 2010 and 2015
 São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP)
 2001, 2003 and 2007
 Minas Gerais Research Foundation (FAPEMIG)
 2014

11. 5. A proposal of new science and innovation indicators:
public attitudes to innovate
 Intuitive approach  the propensity to innovate of an individual or
social group, which, in its turn, depends on attitudes, representations
and shared values (technical and/or technological culture).
 The basic and fundamental propensities of an ordinary person having
the interest, direct and indirect, and the ability to generate
innovations, both technological and non-technological
(organizational, social, etc.).

12. Figure 3 – Propensity to innovate and its environment.
5. A proposal of new science and innovation indicators:
public attitudes to innovate (cont.)

13. 5. A proposal of new science and innovation indicators:
public attitudes to innovate (cont.)
 Five indicators or dimensions of the propensity to innovate:
1. Efficiency
 Doing a job well
 Efficient action
2. Creativity
 Strong relationship with the innovation process
 New and traditional

14. 5. A proposal of new science and innovation indicators:
public attitudes to innovate (cont.)
 Five indicators or dimensions of the propensity to innovate (cont.):
3. Trust in science and technology
 Scientific knowledge and innovation process
4. Uncertainty tolerance (acceptance of risks)
 Entrepreneurial attitude
 Ambiguous feelings: risk aversion and risk seeking

15. 5. A proposal of new science and innovation indicators:
public attitudes to innovate (cont.)
 Five indicators or dimensions of the propensity to innovate (cont.):
5. Cooperation
 Interaction dynamics (networks)
 Types of proximity:
 cognitive
 organizational
 social
 institutional
 geographic

16. 6. Conclusion
 Convergence between
 Innovation Studies approaches
 and the ones of the Public Understanding of Science
 interview protocols at regional and national scales
Reinforcing a true interrelation between basic and applied research

17. 6. Conclusion (cont.)
 The set of propensities to innovate of the society (efficiency,
creativity, trust in S&T, uncertainty tolerance and cooperation)
 an important factor to stimulate innovation processes in the
realm of
 the economics of companies (market perspective)
 the basic and applied science (academic perspective)

18. INNOVATION AND PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE:
Possibility of new indicators for the analysis of public
attitudes to science, technology and innovation
Iván G. Peyré Tartaruga Fundação de Economia e Estatística (FEE)
Rosmari T. Cazarotto Centro Universitario UNIVATES
Clitia H. Backx Martins Fundação de Economia e Estatística (FEE)
Ana Fukui Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS)
State of Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil)
Corresponding author: Iván G. Peyré Tartaruga. E-mail adress ivan@fee.tche.br
III OECD Blue Sky Forum on Science and Innovation Indicators
Ghent (Belgium), 19-21 September 2016