MARCH 10, 2017 FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF OSLO PANEL 6. ECONOMIC-ADMINISTRATIVE RESEARCH

MARCH 10, 2017 FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF OSLO PANEL 6. ECONOMIC-ADMINISTRATIVE RESEARCH

Contents Self-assessment level 1... 2 1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo (UiO)... 2 1.1. Organisation & strategy... 2 1.2. Organisational changes, if relevant... 7 1.3. Resources & infrastructure... 7 1.4. Gender, mobility and career paths... 8 Self-assessment level 2... 11 2. Panel 6: Economic-administrative research... 11 2.1. Employment... 11 2.2. Scientific quality... 13 2.3. Gender perspectives... 16 2.4. If relevant: Interplay between research and education... 17 2.5. Societal relevance... 18 2.6. Impact case studies... 19 Attachments... 20 FACT SHEET (level 1)... 21 Table 1: R&D expenditures and sources of funding (1000 NOK)... 21 Table 2: Number of PhDs graduated at the institution per year... 22 SWOT analysis... 23 Form 1 Number of positions that have been announced during the past three year (2014-2016) and the number of qualified applicants (all levels).... 25 Form 2 Roughly estimate which audience the results of your scientific* publications primarily are intended for (in percentage)... 26 Form 3 Long Term Plan for Research and Higher Education... 27 List of 10 most important publications the last 5-10 years... 31 List of 10 most important dissemination and knowledge exchange results the last 5-10 years... 33 1

Self-assessment level 1 1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo (UiO) 1.1. Organisation & strategy a. Describe how the research institution is organised by 01.01.2017 (refer to organisational map in the fact sheet). If relevant, you may expand on recent organisational changes in a separate item (see item 1.2) The faculty has five disciplinary departments and two centres (hereafter called units). The seven units are the Departments of Sociology and Human Geography, Political Science, Social Anthropology, Economics, Psychology (the latter falling outside the remit of this evaluation), the TIK Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, and ARENA Centre for European Studies. Some of the units also have their own centres and each of the units has their own scientific head. They also have their own administration, each led by a head of office. A board governs the faculty, and a dean heads it. The Dean also chairs the board. The Dean is elected together with a pro-dean and the Dean in addition appoints a vice dean. A faculty director heads the faculty administration that consist of four sections: Office for Studies, Office for Research and Communication, Office for HR, Archive and Economics, and Office for IT and AV services. The Dean is the top-level leader at the faculty with responsibility for all units and the faculty administration. See the organisational map in the fact sheet for an overview. b. Describe briefly the governing structure of the institution, focusing on the delegation of responsibilities for research, knowledge exchange and, if relevant, education, within the organisation. The governing structure of the Faculty is described in The Faculty statutes (Administrasjonsreglementet), revised 15.9.2016: http://www.sv.uio.no/om/organisasjon/reglement/ (only available in Norwegian). Here is a summary: The Faculty Board (11 members) According to the statutes the Faculty board defines the overall objectives, principles and priorities of the faculty strategic plans for the faculty s research, education and dissemination plans and budgets the internal organization of the faculty in departments/centres 2

The Dean has overall authority at the faculty. The leadership is composed of the Dean, the Pro-Dean (Education), the Vice-Dean (Research), the Faculty Director and the assistant Faculty Director. The three pillars that form the work of the faculty are research, teaching and dissemination. The daily running of the units is to a large degree delegated to the units themselves. Each department is managed by a Head of Department who reports to the Dean. The Vice-Dean of research is responsible for development of the PhD-programme, while the Pro-Dean of Education is responsible for the BA- and MA-programmes. Both are also part of the faculty s executive group and thus meet weekly with the Dean and the Faculty Director. The deanship works in close relationship with the units and the faculty administration. The Pro-dean and the Vice-dean work closely with the administrative heads of the corresponding sections in the faculty administration. The Pro-Dean of Education is the dean s stand-in at board meetings if necessary and head of the Council for Study Questions (Forum for studiespørsmål). This Council is an advisory board for the Pro-Dean. The head of studies at each department and three students are members of this council. The aims for this Council are to discuss and exchange experiences within education. The Vice-Dean of Research is head of both the Council for Research Questions (Forum for forskningsspørsmål) and of the Council for the PhD programme (Programrådet for PhD). The Council for the PhD programme consists of an academic from each discipline and two representatives for the PhD-students at the faculty. This Council is responsible for the PhD study programme plan, including programme learning outcome descriptions and the programmes structure. The Council for Research Questions is an advisory board for the Vice-Dean. Each unit is represented either by the head of department or head of research. The Council plans the faculty strategy for research and innovation. c. Present briefly the institution's strategic aims for the next 5-10 years. Include current prioritised research areas. See our current plan (2017-2019: https://www.sv.uio.no/om/strategi/planerrapporter/arsplan_2017_19_endelig.pdf), for our research strategy (only available in Norwegian). To summarise, the Faculty s main research aims are to encourage basic research as well as applied research, theoretical and empirical research, of high quality and relevance. The Faculty shall be at the forefront of international research for some areas and leading in Europe for many more. The Faculty will attract top researchers with its thriving research environment. In 2008 the Faculty defined six prioritised research areas. They are Social equality and economic performance: the Nordic model, Democracy and governance, Globalisation and localization, Social inequality, and Cognitive neuroscience (the latter falling outside the remit 3

of this evaluation). Each of them has been productive, has had impact, and has attracted significant external funding. Within the Horizon2020 framework programme, we are currently participating in 10 projects, of which we lead six, and researchers in our Faculty are holders of a total of 9 ERC grants. We intend to increase our participation in EU projects, both in Societal Challenges thematic calls and in the excellence framework, like Marie Curie and ERC. In order to achieve this we are building administrative competence in support for EU applications and grants, amongst other things appointing a full-time EU administrator and we work proactively matching researchers with appropriate calls. d. Describe current strategies for national and international research collaboration, as well as for collaboration with non-academic partners (private, public or 'third' sector). Our strategy is to be a notable contributor to the development of new knowledge, and we aim to be recognized nationally and internationally as a leading research and educational institution. Our researchers already have substantial national and international research collaboration, and the number of applications for externally-funded projects is increasing each year. The Faculty chooses to facilitate such collaboration by fostering a research environment that acknowledges the importance of bottom-up research. We have several research groups in the international forefront and this inspires others to aim high. The Faculty encourages employees to participate in public committees and other forums that contribute to change and innovation. We also encourage employees to participate in public debate, with an emphasis on communication activities aimed at non-academic professionals and others with professional qualifications and an interest in learning about the state of the art in our research fields. Examples of such communication include public debates, internal and external seminars, public committees and expert groups, acting as expert witnesses in court, and preparation of teaching materials and reports. In this way, the faculty active contributes to societal impact and innovation. e. For those who have been evaluated by the RCN within the last 15 years: Describe how the evaluations have been followed up by the institution. Institutions may refer to previous reporting to the RCN where relevant. «Evaluation of Geography Research in Norway» (January 2011) The Research Council Norway (RCN) announced the funding (ISP-projects) to establish thematic research networks for the period 2013 to 2015. The Department of Sociology and Human Geography (ISS) has been involved in three of the four networks; Network of political geography, economic geography and mobility research. The network of political geography is 4

led by a researcher at the ISS, while the others is administratively organized by other institutions. In all networks, there has been significant activity, which has strengthen the relations between institutions and researchers. Organising workshops with invited international scholars, scientists have joined forces to prepare project proposals, and there are several joint publications on the way. Moreover, the network organized PhD courses in collaboration with the PhD school of geography. The ISP-projects have contributed significantly to fulfilling the recommendations from the evaluation report in 2011. Evaluation of Sociology (2011) The evaluation report recommended a strengthening of the discipline both theoretically and methodologically. The department has done a number of things on this. Most importantly was the establishing of committees on theory and methodology and the subsequent revision of theory and methodology courses in line with the recommendations. We now have solid theoretical and methodological training of our students at both undergraduate and graduate level. In addition, we require theoretical and methodological competence in all new permanent positions. Sociology also got IPS-projects from RCN, the results are forthcoming books, and extensive research collaboration between 30-40 researchers and the project gathered about 75 researchers on a conference with a specific theoretical theme. Regarding the development of the national collaboration in the discipline, it has primarily taken place within each of the ISP projects. In addition, the evaluation helped to characterize the discussions in the national advisory board for sociology, among others with a common focus on the need for better textbooks in sociology at secondary schools, as well as visits to schools to improve recruitment to sociology. Evaluation of Social anthropology (2011) The evaluation report s main recommendation was: Maintain the ethnographic focus, but be more theoretically ambitious so as to optimize the value and impact of the ethnographies. For the department the recommendations were more specific: (1) Lifting the ambition towards generalizing, and support the structures for theoretical advancements on the basis of the solid ethnographic tradition; (2) develop plans to enhance the scientific production of the less productive researchers; (3) focus more on how to support the next generation of researchers, and try to recruit more broadly; (4) consider whether the focus on public dissemination to some extent may overshadow the department s role as a contributor to theoretical advancements in the field. In dialogue with RCN, the department developed a strategy on how to follow up the evaluation. The department got an ISP-project (Anthropos and the Material: Challenges to Anthropology). The goal was to strengthen the theoretical development of the discipline and to increase the number of publication in solid international journals. Three research groups was funded, and they have been active the whole project period (ended 2016). The strategy has among other things resulted in new ideas, perspectives, and new research collaboration across old research groups. In the QS World University Ranking social anthropology at UiO 5

has recently climbed fast and is now number 37 in the world; the highest rank among all departments at the University of Oslo. Evaluation of Economics (2007) The complete Summary statement reads as follows: The Department of Economics at the University of Oslo has established itself as a well-functioning unit that has a high level of research both in quantitative and qualitative terms within its fields of specialization. It is among the best departments in the Nordic countries and has a clear international profile and standing. The main challenges are to strengthen research within its fields of specialization, to solve the recruitment problem and to improve its PhD programme. Another risk is to move away from topics on which the Department has developed a solid reputation. The big plus is the new Centre of Excellence that is bringing new resources and attracts visitors, conferences and doctoral students. The responses to these expressed challenges are all discussed at length in the appropriate parts of the level 2 report for Economics. In short: The research quality is still high and the number of publications in the best journal have increased since the evaluation. There are strong research concentration in several fields. Moreover, there are two formal research groups, ESOP and OFS. The inflow of external funding has brought with it an increased activity and improved quality along several dimensions. International recruitment has a high priority at the department and over the last ten years international recruitment has become the norm. The Department was instrumental in the introduction of tenure track system in Norway, and over the last two years the Department has posted three positions each year. Finally, the PhD programme has had a moderate increase in the number of admitted students. The quality has improved by increasing the number of intensive courses given by international guests. Evaluation of Political science (2002) The Norwegian political science was evaluated in 2002 (Political science in Norway: Status and Challenges. RCN. 2002.). The evaluation panel described the scientific community at the department as internally fragmented. To follow-up the evaluation report, the department applied for a Strategic institute project (IPS-project) from the RCN. The project The conditions of Politics in the neoliberal society (Politikkens vilkår i det nyliberale samfunnet) was conducted in the period 2004-2008 (Project Number 158445 RCN). A driving force behind the project was the desire to strengthen existing and promote new collaborative constellations internally at the department. The project brought people together and resulted in numerous co-authored publications. 6

f. Give a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) of the institution using the enclosed template. See the enclosed template. 1.2. Organisational changes, if relevant Describe recent organisational changes, or planned reorganisations, and the reasons for these changes. Implications of ongoing merging-processes for organisation, governing structures and strategic aims should be described. There are no major changes of organisation at unit level, either underway or planned. There has been a growing tendency to organise research in groups, though an important principle for us remains that groups arise in a bottom-up way. There are three recent changes in how researchers are encouraged to work: One is to plan middle- to long-term, in terms of applying for grants and establishing research networks, the second is to think creatively about the possibilities for initiating novel cross-disciplinary research, and the third is to think carefully about the applications of one s research in terms of impact and innovation. 1.3. Resources & infrastructure a. Give an overview of the resources of the institution by filling in the enclosed fact sheet. See the enclosed fact sheet. b. Describe major research infrastructures (such as databases, archives, laboratories and scientific collections) at the research institution, detailing any important upgrades over the past 5-10 years and/or new equipment needs. Refer to Norway s national strategy for research infrastructure 2012-2017 where relevant. The University of Oslo provides the researchers at our faculty with all infrastructure needed. In 2016 the faculty initiated a joint project on digital infrastructure with The IT-department USIT. Together we are developing a remote access tool for computing, analysing and storing of date. The system is developed in close collaboration with researchers with different needs. Research Computing Services: The University of Oslo has diverse and powerful IT resources to support research activities. They offer support and tools for calculations and simulations, storage and protection of research data, tools and other support for statistics and statistical analysis and qualitative analysis. 7

UiO offer powerful computing resources including the Abel facility and the Colossus compute cluster for sensitive data. Abel is an allround, allpurpose cluster designed to handle multiple concurrent jobs / users with varying requirements. Abel is a joint investment by the Research Council of Norway and UiO, and access is primarily through the Notur project. The cluster is available to all researchers. Colossus is a Linux cluster for research computing within the TSD (sensitive data storage) firewall and serves the high performance computing needs of TSD users. Colossus has been designed to be as similar to Abel as possible (user friendly). Like Abel, Colossus is an allround cluster designed to handle multiple concurrent jobs and users with varying requirements. Colossus is available for all TSD users. UiO offers software and dedicated servers to support research statistics. UiO also offer our own data collection tool, and software and counselling for qualitative analysis. Through the University Library all researchers get access to scientific journals and collections. The Library also provides you with information about publishing standards, Open Access, reference tools and more. Storing and securing research data: Researchers at University of Oslo will get help to store and secure all the data needed to conduct their research. For storing big amounts of data, you can apply the use of NorStore resources. NorStore is a Norwegian national data storage project. The objective of NorStore is to provide the Norwegian research community with a storage infrastructure for non-sensitive data. The infrastructure is financed in part by the Research Council of Norway and in part by the participating institutions. The infrastructure is open to research groups from all universities, university colleges and research organizations in Norway. Filesender is a web based application that allows authenticated users to securely and easily send arbitrarily large files to other users. It is a collaborative effort of the national research networks of Norway (Uninett), Ireland (Heanett), Australia (Aarnet) and Nederlands (Surfnet). 1.4. Gender, mobility and career paths a. Describe the research institution s policy for gender equality, and how this is followed up. In line with the University of Oslo s employment policies, all hiring of new staff at the faculty is subject to the use a moderate gender bias by stating in announcement texts that the university aims to achieve a balanced gender composition in the workforce. 8

The faculty encourages female post-doctoral fellows to attend UiO s mentoring programme. Female researchers who are permanent members of staff are given first priority for the research leadership and other career building programmes at UiO. Apart from the expected direct positive effects on their research leadership skills, these also aim to increase their chances of securing external funding, with the ultimate twin aims of qualifying for promotion to professor and securing ERC grants. Additionally, resources are used to hire international female adjunct professors in temporary positions. In 2016 33% of professors were women, 49% of assistant professors, 48% of postdocs, and 54% of PhD research students. 1 b. Describe the institution's policy for mobility and career paths. Include to what extent researchers are recruited from other Norwegian and/or international institutions. Where relevant, please describe policies for international collaboration and career planning for PhD-students and postdocs. We encourage mobility for all faculty staff members. There is extensive activity with regard to participation in seminars and conferences around the world, shorter and longer visits to other institutions in nationally and internationally, as well as adjunct positions at other institutions, mostly, but not exclusively, in Norway. Career planning mainly centres on encouraging recently-appointed lecturers to fulfil the criteria for promotion to full professorship. The Faculty has recently refined the guidelines for promotion, by clarifying the scientific requirements: we hope this will make career planning easier. The Faculty also encourages and facilitates grant applications for all researchers, thereby helping them to plan their research over the medium to long term. Appraisal interviews ( medarbeidersamtaler ) are instituted in all parts of the organisation and career planning is one of the topics discussed. All positions are announced internationally and there is an increasing proportion of international appointments. Of 37 appointments in 2016, 17 were international Mobility and career planning are discussed with PhD students employed by the faculty, in yearly appraisal interviews. All PhD students are encouraged to have a study and research period abroad during their PhD training. Study and research periods abroad most often take the form of a stay as a visiting PhD student, visiting researcher or in connection with supervision, courses at institutions, collection of data or fieldwork. Data from 2015 show that 50% of PhD students hosted at the faculty have such visits, ie beyond participation in international conferences. 1 Source: DBH 9

The faculty has five exchange agreements that include the PhD level. The faculty s summer school at the PhD level, Oslo Summer School in Comparative Social Science Studies, is an important factor when it comes to international interaction and collaboration. Participation in research schools, for example The Norwegian Research School in Innovation and The Research School on Peace and Conflict, with an international component such as international faculty or members, exposes PhD candidates to international networks. The research centre, ARENA, coordinates a PhD network funded by the European Union s Horizon 2020 Programme Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions with nine academic and eleven private European partners; The Post-Crisis Legitimacy of the European Union (PLATO). c. Has the institution implemented the European Charter & Code and been awarded the brand "HR Excellence in Research", or will the European Charter & Code be implemented soon? If not, please elaborate on the reason for this. This page summarises the University s work on the Charter and Code within the framework of HRS4R: https://www.uio.no/english/for-employees/support/human-resources/personnelpolicy/uio-workingconditions-academicstaff/chartercode-gapanalysis.html 10

Self-assessment level 2 2. Panel 6: Economic-administrative research The Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Oslo does not have a Department or organizational unit that is entirely devoted to economic-administrative research. However, the Faculty s Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK) has a research group in innovation studies. Research and teaching activities in innovation studies at TIK study the creation and diffusion of advanced technologies, their economic determinants in private firms and public organizations, and their economic and societal impacts. As such, TIK s innovation studies activities are thematically close and highly relevant to economic-administrative research at large. This document will therefore present a self-assessment of economicadministrative research in the field of innovation studies carried out at the TIK Centre. 2.1. Employment a. Please describe plans for recruitment within the research discipline. During the last five years, TIK s staff in innovation studies has expanded considerably, particularly through a large number of new externally funded research projects. At present, the staff consists of nearly 30 researchers: TIK s Director, four tenured staff (Professor level; two of which are close to the retirement age), two externally funded senior researchers, one adjunct Professor, five postdocs and about 15 PhD students. The group is one of the main hubs for innovation studies in the country, and it has a strong scientific standing and societal impact. The group s large number of younger researchers (PhD, postdoc, and non-tenured researchers) are mostly funded through externally funded research projects. These younger researchers represent an important basis for TIK and other leading research units to recruit new senior academic researchers in the future. Due to a large number of new externally funded projects acquired in the last five years, the number of younger researchers at TIK has increased substantially. The recent growth of junior staff at TIK is a very positive development. In addition to expanding the Centre s size, TIK s innovation studies research has broadened the thematic scope of its research activities in recent years (see section on scientific quality below). Innovation studies staff has also become more international. At present, about 30% of the staff is accounted for by foreign researchers. All new positions are announced internationally. However, the recent expansion of young researchers at TIK has not been followed by an expansion of senior-level tenured positions. These are internally funded through the Faculty s core grants, and these internal funding is not sufficient to finance new positions at the 11

Associate Professor (or Professor) level. As noted above, TIK s innovation studies staff has at present only four tenured positions (Professor level), and there are no possibilities to increase this number due to limited core grants from the Faculty. In summary, TIK s staff carrying out economic-administrative research in innovation studies does currently present a mismatch: on the one hand, there is an increasing number of junior researchers (in need of supervision) and of externally funded research projects (that require coordination and management); on the other hand, there is only a small and stable core of tenured senior researchers that can carry out these supervision and coordination activities. This mismatch leads to a capacity constraint: TIK s tenured staff in innovation studies does not have sufficient capacity / time to carry out the activities that TIK s increasing activity level demands for. b. Give an overview in Form 1 of the number of positions that have been announced within the research discipline during the past three years (2014-2016) and the number of qualified applicants (all levels). Include to what extent researchers are recruited from other institutions in Norway or internationally. Please see attached Form 1. c. If relevant, please describe how the PhD training is organized and to what degree PhD students are included in larger projects within the research discipline. TIK has currently 15 PhD students in Innovation Studies. The PhD in Innovation Studies is a track in the Faculty s PhD programme: https://www.sv.uio.no/english/research/phd/. Organization and structure of TIK s PhD track is therefore based upon the Faculty s guidelines. At present, ten PhD students in innovation studies are externally funded through research projects that are broadly related to the economic-administrative discipline (see list of these projects in table 3 below). PhD students in Innovation Studies are offered a variety of courses every year. There is a biennial PhD course in economics of innovation, and specific courses related to projects (one on industrial dynamics in 2016 and one planned for 2017 related to public science and innovation). These courses also attract students from other institutions. The research school NORSI ( Norwegian Research School in Innovation ) is central for other PhD coursework, network building and particular activities (e.g. writing seminar related to kappe /expanded introduction; PhD level research conference). Within the international EU-SPRI network there are courses, younger researcher workshops and conferences and opportunities for young personnel exchange. TIK s innovation group is part of EU-SPRI s new summer/winter school initiative with a summer school planned for 2018. In addition, TIK organises courses in innovation studies for the Oslo Summer School in Social Sciences (2015: Innovation in networks ; 2016: Finance and innovation ; 2017: Responsible research and innovation ). 12

d. Indicate the normal distribution of time between research, teaching and other activities (administrative tasks, project acquisition etc.) for all academic positions and policies for redistribution of tasks between staff. According to UiO s personnel policy, tenured researchers have to divide their working time between research activities (47%) and teaching and administrative activities (53%). TIK has an internal policy ( frikjøp policy ) according to which tenured researchers that are engaged in externally funded research projects can decrease the amount of working time devoted to teaching and administrative activities. In practice, most tenured researchers at TIK are actively engaged in external projects, and this means that the estimated share of working time that they can dedicate to research activities is around 60% on average. Other researchers in innovation studies (PhD, postdoc, non-tenured researchers) do not have any contractual obligations to work on teaching and administrative activities, and hence work full-time on research. Occasionally, some of the PhD students are invited to contribute to teaching and supervision activities for TIK s Master program, and their contracts are correspondingly extended. e. If relevant, describe the policy for research leave/sabbatical leave for academic staff. The policy for research leave/sabbatical leave for academic staff is regulated by the Faculty s and UiO s guidelines. 2.2. Scientific quality a. Give a brief overview of the research activities and research groups within the research discipline. Please provide details of the most important contributions to the larger research community over the last 5-10 years. Please include a list of the most important publications resulting from the research in this period (maximum ten publications). TIK s innovation studies group is among the strongest research environments in the field in Norway. Internationally, its ambition is to be among the leading units in its field. These ambitions imply that the group s researchers are visible in international conferences, key journals and training arenas. TIK s innovation group is modelled on similar groups found in the UK, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Germany. There are no sub-groups in TIK s innovation studies group, although a wide selection of economic-administrative research topics is represented. Specifically, three main thematic areas are given priority. The first is the economics of innovation, which studies the economic determinants and impacts of innovation and how these differ across countries, regions, sectors and firms. The second is related to systems of innovation, the process of transitions and structural change of these, and the interplay between 13

public policies and private sector innovative strategies with a special emphasis on natural sources and renewable energy innovations. The third main thematic area is tied to how innovation and research activities are organised in networks and collaborative efforts within specific industries and other settings. All three thematic areas have a common focus on the creation and diffusion of innovation in firms and public organizations, which explain their relevance for the economic-administrative discipline. More specific characteristics that are common to the three thematic areas are an explicit focus on science and innovation policy, a Schumpeterian/evolutionary perspective on innovation in private firms and public organizations, and the attempt to combine insights from qualitative and quantitative empirical research. With the establishment of the new eight-year OSIRIS research centre, oriented at understanding the preconditions for impact of science, innovation studies research at TIK has recently strengthened its science policy profile significantly. TIK s innovation research is primarily intended for an international academic audience, and it is typically published in prestigious academic outlets in the field such as the top journal in the field of innovation studies, Research Policy, among many others. Much of this research has high international visibility and impacts in the academic community (e.g. as measured in terms of citations statistics and other bibliometric indicators). Some selected examples of important research contributions by TIK s innovation scholars can be noted. One is the authoritative mapping of the emerging field of innovation studies done by Jan Fagerberg during the last ten years. This research resulted in the publication of the Oxford Handbook of Innovation (Fagerberg et al., Oxford University Press, 2005; 1400 + citations in Google Scholar); and later also the special issue in Research Policy (2012). Another research strand has investigated sectoral differences in innovation activities in manufacturing and service industries, and how firms innovative activities are shaped by sectoral characteristics and the innovation policy framework (Castellacci, Research Policy, 2008; 400 + citations in Google Scholar; and the special issue of Industrial and Corporate Change in 2012 by Fagerberg et al.). Thirdly, several published papers by Gulbrandsen and colleagues have analysed universityindustry relations (Gulbrandsen and Smeby, Research Policy, 2005; 500 + citations in Google Scholar; and the special issue of Research Policy in 2011 edited by Gulbrandsen et al.). Further, the book Innovation, Path-Dependency, and Policy (Fagerberg et al., 2009, Oxford UP) is the central reference for the historical development of the Norwegian innovation system, and it represents a good illustration of TIK s research on innovation systems, which is currently focusing on the transition towards a renewable energy system. A more recent strand of studies at TIK is now carrying out research on innovation in the health sector, which lies at the intersection of health and innovation studies. An example of published work in this area is for instance recent research unpacking medical innovation and 14

the role of hospitals (Gulbrandsen et al. 2016, Thune & Mina 2016, special issue in Research Policy in 2016). See the enclosed list of 10 most important publications in innovation studies at TIK during the last ten years (the list is presented in chronological order). b. Describe strategies for research development within the discipline, including strategies for scientific publications. As noted above, innovation studies research at TIK is hampered by the limited size of its staff (and particularly tenured staff at Professor level). One of the strategies that TIK follows to overcome this limitation is to develop strong links and collaborations with other units in the same and in neighbouring fields of research. Innovation studies represent a highly multidisciplinary and collaborative field. Almost all research activities in this field at TIK involve collaborating with innovation researchers in other countries. Among the most important international research partners are SPRU (Sussex, UK), MIOIR (Manchester, UK), Ingenio (Valencia, Spain), and CIRCLE (Lund, Sweden), among others. The EU-SPRI network is also important; TIK is a member of this network together with the major science and innovation policy oriented research units in Europe (and represented in the executive committee) and host for the planned annual scientific conference in 2021. The group has also extensive collaboration across disciplinary boundaries, particularly within the area of renewable energy transitions and innovation in life science and medicine. Research partners are within odontology, medicine, technology and natural sciences at the University of Oslo and elsewhere (NTNU, Nofima). The innovation group has a tradition for collaboration with policymakers as well as private industry. There is formal project collaboration with users in the Research Council of Norway (RCN) and various ministries not least through the largescale project OSIRIS. Current research and user partners in the public and private sector include Telenor, Aker Solution, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS), the health region South-East, the Norwegian Welfare directorate, Ministry of Science and Education, etc. The innovation group currently has one industry PhD fellow and two public sector PhD candidates. Regarding the strategy aimed at increasing the quantity and quality of publications, TIK has recently introduced a new publication bonus system to provide researchers with a stronger incentive to publish internationally. In addition, there is a publication workshop that is organized once every semester to discuss the staff s work in progress leading to journal publications. Overall, researchers in the innovation group aim at publishing in relevant, high quality outlets (journals and publishing houses). As noted above, TIK s innovation group is highly visible in the world s leading scientific journal in innovation studies, Research Policy, for example through co-editing three recent special issues (2011, 2012 and 2016) and in several other articles. The innovation group has steadily increased the number of publication points per capita since 2013 and increased the share of level-2 publications in the Norwegian 15

system in the same period. The group s working paper series, part of the REPEC/IDEAS international archive, has high visibility, ranking, and a high number of downloads. c. Please estimate the primary audience of your scientific publications in Form 2. See the enclosed Form 2. d. Please describe the significance of external research funding to the development of scientific quality within the research discipline. TIK s research in innovation studies is highly dependent upon external funding. If we focus only on R&D expenses, more than 80 per cent of the group s funding is external, which generates a high working pressure and other challenges. External funding is an essential part of discussions among researchers in the group, and the group has had a number of large-scale and smaller projects from RCN, EU (Horizon2020), OECD and industry in recent years. The reason for the great and increasing share of external funding is twofold: on the one hand, TIK s core funding has decreased slightly in real terms every year since 2003, generating a greater need to acquire external funding; on the other hand, most research themes in TIK s fields of expertise have great societal and policy relevance, so that there is high demand for projects in this field both in Norway and at the EU level. As illustrated in table 3 below, many of the externally funded research projects on innovation are closely related to some of the priority areas identified in the long-term plan (LTP) for research and higher education 2015 2024. For both of these reasons, it is natural to carry out much of the centre s research in innovation studies on a project basis, and with the objective of combining high academic quality with high societal relevance. 2.3. Gender perspectives a. Describe the extent to which gender perspectives are integrated in the research within the discipline, providing examples of relevant projects and/or publications. The field of innovation studies does not present gender issues or unbalances. TIK s staff in innovation studies has at present a quite balanced representation of male and female researchers (ca. 50% each). The Centre follows strictly the Faculty s guidelines on gender representation. In particular, all recruitment processes must ensure representation of both genders in scientific committees. Further, female Associate Professors that seek to qualify for the Professor level can benefit of a special Faculty s support scheme in the period before the application. Last but not least, according to the Faculty s gender policy, in all Departments adjunct Professors (Professor II) have always to maintain a balance between female and male researchers. 16

b. Please identify a contact person for forthcoming mapping of gender research in Norway. At faculty level: Johannes Elgvin 2.4. If relevant: Interplay between research and education a. Indicate the linkages between the research within the panels of the evaluation and the study programmes offered by the institution. Use the enclosed excel file to indicate the study programmes based on the teaching activities of the researchers to be evaluated by the panel. If applicable, list research groups that are linked with the study programmes. Innovation studies researchers at TIK regularly teach and supervise students at the Centre s two master programmes: Technology, Innovation and Knowledge (TIK, 2-year Master degree), and Society, Science and Technology in Europe (ESST, 1,5-year Master degree). See enclosed Excel-file Overview of study programmes. These Master programs enrol 30 new students every year, which are selected from a total number of around 400 applicants. The structure and content of these programs is available at the web link: http://www.uio.no/studier/program/tik-master/oppbygging/. After taking a first introduction course in innovation, science and technology studies in the first semester, the students must choose a specialization during the second semester. Around tree out of four Master students, usually choose innovation as their specialisation, where TIK s researchers in innovation studies teach the specialization courses, and supervise the students for their Master theses. b. To what extent are students involved in staff research? Describe how and on what levels. Master students are involved in staff research in two ways. First, students are given the possibility to write their Master theses on topics that are related to some of the ongoing projects at TIK. This greatly facilitates the students work in defining a topic of interest, an original research question, and get access to data and documents of relevance with the support of the project team and framework. Second, a few selected students are invited to work on a part-time basis on some of TIK s externally funded projects. Every year, about 10% of TIK s Master students work at the Centre as part-time research assistants, at the same time as they work on their Master theses. 17

c. Indicate the main challenges for optimizing the interplay of education and research within the discipline and the measures taken to meet these challenges. Until recently, a challenge for optimizing the interplay of education and research within TIK s Master programs was represented by the fact that the Centre s Master students did not have to attend courses in research methodology. The lack of strong methodological foundations hampered the possibility to integrate the students in the Centre s research projects, and later employ them as PhD students. However, this challenge has seriously been faced and overcome in recent years. TIK s Master students are now offered a systematic introduction to research methods. They first have to attend a general introduction to research methods during the first semester, and then a more specialized course (in either qualitative or quantitative methods) during the second semester. 2.5. Societal relevance a. Please indicate the relevance of the research within the discipline for the thematic priorities set out in Norwegian Government s Long-Term Plan for Research and Higher Education or list other relevant policy documents in Form 3. As noted above, TIK s research in innovation studies relies to a large extent on externally funded research projects. Most of the external projects are funded by Norwegian agencies such as the Research Council of Norway and the Ministry of Education and Research. A natural consequence of this is that TIK s research projects in innovation studies are designed and developed in close collaboration with these agencies and related academic and user partners, thus ensuring their societal relevance. Specifically, all three main thematic areas that are prioritized at TIK within innovation studies have a number of ongoing externally funded projects that explicitly address some of the priority areas of the long-term plan for research and higher education. As noted in table 3 below, for instance, TIK has two large ongoing projects / centres related to the priority area Public sector renewal, better and more effective welfare ; two research projects that investigate themes related to Innovative and adaptable industry, and six ongoing projects / centres related to the priority area Climate, environment and clean energy. See Form 3, table 3 for the list. b. Describe strategies for dissemination, user-involvement and knowledge exchange, identifying any particular obstacles to achieving these aims within the discipline. Since much of TIK s research in innovation studies is project-based and externally funded, it is natural for it to have a strong component of dissemination and user-involvement. In fact, most funding programmes to which TIK participates (such as those of the Research Council of Norway, or the EU Horizon 2020 program) requires applicants to make specific and feasible plans of dissemination and of involvement of other academic partners, stakeholders, policy makers and/or industry users. As such, all research projects at TIK, such as those noted in the table above, have specific dissemination and user involvement plans, which are regularly monitored and followed up by the funding agencies that manage these projects. 18

For these reasons, TIK s innovation studies group has a strong external collaboration profile with non-academic partners. Group members make a large number of public/non-academic presentations every year and publish occasional popular science articles. There is formal project collaboration with policymakers in the Research Council of Norway and various ministries and with private firms. Despite its small size TIK s innovation group has been one of few units at the Faculty with formalised co-operation with industry (e.g. the Telenor-TIK project collaborations ongoing since 2013). Current research and user partners in the public and private sector include also partners such as Aker Solution, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS), the health region South-East, the Norwegian Welfare directorate, and the Ministry of Science and Education. The large-scale centre OSIRIS (the Oslo Institute for Research on the Impact of Science) is particularly important in the group s external collaboration. OSIRIS, funded for eight years as a centre of excellence by the Research Council of Norway, involves significant collaboration with policy actors in Norway and other countries. c. Please provide a list of ten important examples of dissemination/knowledge exchange activities of the research unit from the last 5-10 years. See enclosed list. 2.6. Impact case studies The institution is invited to document examples (cases) of the impact of their research beyond academia, according to the definitions provided in the attached form. Please note the following requirements for reporting impact: a. The research underpinning the impact cases should be anchored within the research institution. b. Both the research and the impact should have been produced within the last 10 15 years. Priority should be given to more recent examples. Special circumstances may allow for extending the given time interval when necessary to explain longer research traditions relevant to the reported impact. In such cases, great importance should be attached to documenting tangible impacts within the time frame provided. c. Each research institution is invited to submit one case per research discipline. If desired, the institution may submit further cases for evaluation, limited upwards to one case per ten researchers participating on one panel. See separate attachment for the Impact case TelenoR 19

Attachments Fact sheet, including organisational map and list of funding sources SWOT analysis Form 1: Number of positions that have been announced during the past three years and the number of qualified applicants. Form 2: Audience of the results of scientific publications Form 3: Research matching the priorities in the Norwegian Government s Long-Term Plan for Research and Higher Education and list of other relevant policy documents List of 10 most important publications List of 10 most important dissemination and knowledge exchange results Template for case studies: The societal impact of the research (separate file) Excel-file: Overview of study programmes (separate file) 20