Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science

Academic scientists are encouraged to pursue research that delivers both scientific and societal impact. This may involve a search for alternative mechanisms of social approval which lead to endorsement of scientists’ research goals. We explore how scientists mobilise and accumulate different forms...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Llopis Córcoles, Óscar, D'Este Cukierman, Pablo, McKelvey, Maureen, Yegros Yegros, Alfredo
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Institución:Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
Repositorio:DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC
OAI Identifier:oai:digital.csic.es:10261/283315
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10261/283315
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Institutional logics
Science logic
Legitimacy
Societal impact
Innovation involvement
Research-related legitimacy ties
Reputation-based legitimacy
Beneficiary-based legitimacy
Descripción
Sumario:Academic scientists are encouraged to pursue research that delivers both scientific and societal impact. This may involve a search for alternative mechanisms of social approval which lead to endorsement of scientists’ research goals. We explore how scientists mobilise and accumulate different forms of legitimacy, which might favour their participation in practices related to innovation and societal impact. We propose three specific sources of scientific legitimacy: i) scientists’ social networks (research-related legitimacy ties), ii) prominence in the relevant academic community (reputation-based legitimacy); and direct contact with the primary beneficiaries of the research (beneficiary-based legitimacy). To explain scientists’ participation in activities oriented towards innovation and societal impact, we test the significance of each of these sources of legitimacy and their potential interplay empirically, using a large sample of Spanish biomedical scientists.