Beyond the ‘usual suspects’ – Alternative qualitative methods for innovation policy studies
Nordling, Nadja and Pugh, Rhiannon LU
(2019)
In African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development
11(4).
p.513-522
- Abstract
- In this paper we make three points about the current state and promising future directions of qualitative research in our field of innovation policy research. First, we argue that research design and methods are dealt with quite superficially in most innovation policy studies papers and journals providing little guidance to new scholars as to how to approach their research. Secondly we argue that when methods are discussed, it tends to be a narrow range of qualitative methods that are used – most commonly a case study approach drawing on interviews and document analysis. Thirdly, we suggest broadening our approach to contain more participatory and action-based research; these are suggested as ways to include more groups in the research... (More)
- In this paper we make three points about the current state and promising future directions of qualitative research in our field of innovation policy research. First, we argue that research design and methods are dealt with quite superficially in most innovation policy studies papers and journals providing little guidance to new scholars as to how to approach their research. Secondly we argue that when methods are discussed, it tends to be a narrow range of qualitative methods that are used – most commonly a case study approach drawing on interviews and document analysis. Thirdly, we suggest broadening our approach to contain more participatory and action-based research; these are suggested as ways to include more groups in the research design, increase the impact of our work and allow us a deeper understanding of the formulation and development of innovation policy as is possible. We do not argue that the old methods should be put aside but that new additional approaches could be considered to capture the essence of innovation policy formulation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/8b1019ce-dbd8-4e3b-b7f3-d4fbcd399371
- author
- Nordling, Nadja
and Pugh, Rhiannon
LU
- publishing date
- 2019-06-07
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development
- volume
- 11
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 513 - 522
- publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85062366700
- ISSN
- 2042-1338
- DOI
- 10.1080/20421338.2018.1537106
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- 8b1019ce-dbd8-4e3b-b7f3-d4fbcd399371
- date added to LUP
- 2020-09-09 10:39:42
- date last changed
- 2022-04-19 00:39:20
@article{8b1019ce-dbd8-4e3b-b7f3-d4fbcd399371,
abstract = {{In this paper we make three points about the current state and promising future directions of qualitative research in our field of innovation policy research. First, we argue that research design and methods are dealt with quite superficially in most innovation policy studies papers and journals providing little guidance to new scholars as to how to approach their research. Secondly we argue that when methods are discussed, it tends to be a narrow range of qualitative methods that are used – most commonly a case study approach drawing on interviews and document analysis. Thirdly, we suggest broadening our approach to contain more participatory and action-based research; these are suggested as ways to include more groups in the research design, increase the impact of our work and allow us a deeper understanding of the formulation and development of innovation policy as is possible. We do not argue that the old methods should be put aside but that new additional approaches could be considered to capture the essence of innovation policy formulation.}},
author = {{Nordling, Nadja and Pugh, Rhiannon}},
issn = {{2042-1338}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{06}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{513--522}},
publisher = {{Taylor & Francis}},
series = {{African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development}},
title = {{Beyond the ‘usual suspects’ – Alternative qualitative methods for innovation policy studies}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2018.1537106}},
doi = {{10.1080/20421338.2018.1537106}},
volume = {{11}},
year = {{2019}},
}