How we think about and act on the usefulness of scientific research has epistemological and political implications: what knowledge consists of, how it comes about and to what ends. In this... Show moreHow we think about and act on the usefulness of scientific research has epistemological and political implications: what knowledge consists of, how it comes about and to what ends. In this dissertation, I situate the usefulness of scientific research in concrete places for knowledge exchange. The exchange of knowledge within and between environments is shaped by many spatial factors: from architectural designs, physical proximity and material infrastructures to city planning, regional development and geopolitics. And not only knowledge travels: also spatial models for research organisation circulate. Focusing on ‘utility spots’ instead of prominent scientists, dominant disciplines or powerful organisations is proposed as a fruitful way to highlight the intersection of political, societal, economic, cultural and scientific developments. In this dissertation I propose and develop the utility spot concept as spatio-historical approach to the epistemology of useful scientific research. This allows me to relate different utility concepts to the histories of science, universities, science policy, and the geopolitics of the Atlantic world in the second half of the twentieth century. Future research into previous, current and future organisation of scientific research with societal value could focus on the politics of proximity (in multiple dimensions) at various utility spots. Show less
Many countries have amended legislation and introduced policies to stimulate universities to transfer their knowledge to society. The effects of these policies on scientists are relatively... Show moreMany countries have amended legislation and introduced policies to stimulate universities to transfer their knowledge to society. The effects of these policies on scientists are relatively unexplored. We employ principal–agent theory to increase our understanding of the relationship between impact policies and scientific practice. Our methodology includes the analysis of policy documents and of data gathered in focus groups. We conclude that there is a gap between policy on the one hand and how scientists perceive it on the other. Policy documents put forward a broad notion of impact, but scientists perceive them as focusing too narrowly on commercial impacts. Scientists are further puzzled by how societal impact is evaluated and organised, and their perceptions frame their behaviour. Our policy recommendations focus on improving the interaction between intermediaries, such as universities and research councils, and scientists so as to include the latter’s perspective in policy-making. Show less
