The task of designing social impact of science (SIS) indicators is an ill-structured or systemic problem involving competing design goals, indeterminate design states, unspecified design rules, and an unbounded design space. These features of the problem are not a result of imperfections of measurement alone; they are due primarily to properties of the knowledge system that make it resemble a tangled river delta (anastomotic reticulum) in which different functional patterns (serial, parallel, assembly, arborescent, segmented, cyclic) coexist. The stunning complexity of knowledge systems makes it difficult but nevertheless possible to develop SIS indicators that are policy relevant by virtue of their being at once relational, causal, and normative (see also Peters, this volume). Any attempt to improve the policy relevance of impact indicators will recognize that systemic problems require nonconventional solutions based on principles of externalization, formalization, and simplification. An initial attempt to externalize the design process yields typologies of science output indicators and social impact indicators that may be conjoined to form social impact of science (SIS) indicators. By formalizing rules for making and challenging causal inferences, we can formulate rival hypotheses about the role of knowledge functions and structures in mediating the impacts of science on the achievement of social goals. By simplifying the design process we can maximize the likelihood that SIS indicators and the basis for their construction are widely comprehended by groups that have a stake in the social performance of science.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ACKOFF, R. L.
(1974) Redesigning the Future: A Systems Approach to Societal Problems. New York: John Wiley.
2.
BEER, S.
(1981) The Brain of the Firm. New York: John Wiley.
3.
CARTWRIGHT, D.
(1973) “Determinants of scientific progress.”Amer. Psychologist28, 3: 222-231.
4.
CHURCHMAN, C. W.
(1971) The Design of Inquiring Systems: Basic Concepts of Systems and Organization. New York: Basic Books.
5.
CONGER, D. S.
(1974) Social Inventions. Saskatchewan, Canada: Saskatchewan Newstart, Information Canada.
6.
COOK, T. D.
and D. T. CAMPBELL (1979) Quasi-Experimentation. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
7.
DeMAY, M.
(1982) The Cognitive Paradigm. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.
8.
DEUTSCH, K. W.
, A. D. MARKOVITS, and J. PLATT (1985) Advances in the Social Sciences, 1900-1980. Lanham, MD: Univ. Press of America and Abt Books.
9.
DUNCAN, O. D.
(1969) Toward Social Reporting: The Next Steps. New York: Russell Sage.
10.
DUNCAN, O. D.
(1978) “Science indicators and social indicators,” in Y. Elkanaet al. (eds.) Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators. New York: John Wiley.
11.
DUNN, W. N.
, B. HOLZNER, and M. SHAHIDULLAH (1986) “The impact of science on American society: toward a metric of science applications.”Prepared for the Science Indicators Unit, Science Resources Studies Division, National Science Foundation. Pittsburgh, PA: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Center for International Studies and Program for the Study of Knowledge Use.
12.
ELKANA, Y.
(1978) “The political context of science indicators,” in Y. Elkanaet al. (eds.) Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators. New York: John Wiley.
13.
GEORGHIOU, L.
, J. S. METCALFE, M. GIBBONS, T. RAY, and J. EVANS [eds.] (1986) Post-Innovation Performance: Technological Development and Competition. New York: Macmillan.
14.
GLASER, E. M.
, H. H. ABELSON, and C. N. GARRISON (1983) Putting Knowledge to Use. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
HABERMAS, J.
(1975). Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon.
16.
HARMON, P.
and D. KING (1985) Artificial Intelligence. New York: John Wiley.
17.
HOLTON, G.
(1978) “Can science be measured?” in Y. Elkanaet al. (eds.) Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators. New York: John Wiley.
18.
HOROWITZ, I. L.
and J. E. KATZ (1975) Social Science and Public Policy in the United States. New York: Praeger.
19.
JEVONS, F. R.
(1972) “Preface,” in J. Langrishet al. (eds.) Wealth From Knowledge: A Study of Innovation in Industry. New York: John Wiley.
20.
KEYWORD, G. W.
(1986) “The federal role in R&D.” Presented at the workshop on Economic Impacts of R&D. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine.
21.
KNORR-CETINA, K. D.
(1981) “Time and context in practical action: underdetermination and knowledge use.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization3: 143-165.
22.
KOCHEN, M.
(1978) “Models of scientific output,” in Y. Elkanaet al. (eds.) Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators. New York: John Wiley.
23.
KOCHEN, M.
(1987) “Indicators of how knowledge structuring may affect well-being.” Presented at the International Conference on the Impact of Science on American Society, Augsburg, Federal Republic of Germany, May 4-8.
24.
KODAMA, F.
(1985) “A system approach to science indicators—a preliminary study of the development of Japanese science indicators systems.” Presented to the Third Seminar on Japanese-West German-Swedish Cross Country Study on Structure and Functions of Basic Technology Research, Karlsruhe, Federal Republic of Germany, November 11-13.
25.
LANGRISH, J.
, M. GIBBONS, W. J. EVANS, and F. R. JEVONS (1972) Wealth from Knowledge: A Study of Innovation in Industry. New York: John Wiley.
26.
LAYTON, E.
(1977) “Conditions of technological progress,” in I. Spiegel-Rosing and D. J. deS. Price (eds.) Science, Technology and Society. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
LePAIR, C.
(1987) “Science influences society—a paradox: muddling through with indicators.” Presented at the International Conference on the Impact of Science on American Society, Augsburg, Federal Republic of Germany, May 4-8.
28.
LINDBLOM, C. E.
and D. K. COHEN (1979) Usable Knowledge. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
29.
LINSTONE, H. A.et al.
(1981) “The multiple perspective concept with applications to technology assessment and other decision areas.”Technological Forecasting and Social Change20: 275-325.
30.
MacRAE, D., Jr.
(1985) Policy Indicators. Chapel Hill, NC: Univ. of North Carolina Press.
31.
MacRAE, D., Jr.
(1986) “Democratic information systems: policy indicators and public statistics,” in W. N. Dunn (ed.) Policy Analysis: Perspectives, Concepts, and Methods. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
32.
MacRAE, D., Jr.
(1987) “Building policy-related technical communities.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization8, 3: 431-462.
33.
MITROFF, I. I.
and R. O. MASON (1980) Creating a Dialectical Social Science: Concepts, Methods, and Models. Dordrecth, Holland: D. Reidel.
34.
MITROFF, I. I.
, R. O. MASON, and V. P. BARABBA (1980) The 1980 Census, Policymaking Amid Turbulence. Lexington, MA: Lexington.
35.
MULKAY, M.
(1979) “Knowledge and utility: implications for the sociology of knowledge.”Social Studies of Sci.9: 63-80.
36.
PRICE, D. J. deS.
(1963) Big Science, Little Science. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
37.
PRIGOGINE, I.
and J. STENGERS (1985) Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature. Toronto: Bantam.
38.
RAVETZ, J.
(1985) “Usable knowledge, usable ignorance: incomplete science with policy implications,” in Clark and Mum (eds.) Sustainable Development of the Biosphere. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
39.
REISMAN, A.
(1987) “Expansion of knowledge via consolidation of knowledge” (Technical Memorandum #594). Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve Univ., Department of Operations Research.
40.
ROTHMAN, J.
(1980) Social R&D. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
41.
SAATY, T. L.
(1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: John Wiley.
42.
SCHMANDT, J.
and J. E. KATZ (1986) “The scientific state: a theory with hypotheses.”Sci., Technology, and Human Values11, 1: 40-52.
43.
SCHNEYER, S.
, J. S. LANDERFELD, and F. H. SANDIFER (1981) “Bio-medical research and illness.”Health and Society59, 1: 44-58.
44.
SIMON, H. A.
(1973) “The structure of ill-structured problems.”Artificial Intelligence4: 181-201.
45.
SPIEGEL-ROSING, I.
(1977) “The study of science, technology, and society (SSTS): recent trends and future challenges,” in I. Spiegel-Rosing and D. J. deS. Price (eds.) Science, Technology and Society: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
(1980) Social Indicators, III. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
47.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(1986) The 1990 Health Objectives for the Nation: A Midcourse Review. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
48.
U.S. National Science Board
(1985) Science Indicators: The 1985 Report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
49.
WARFIELD, P. N.
(1976) Societal Systems: Planning, Policy, and Complexity. New York: John Wiley.
50.
WHITEHEAD, A. N.
and B. RUSSELL (1925) Principia Mathematica, Vol. 1, 2nd ed.London: Cambridge Univ. Press.
51.
ZIMAN, J.
(1978) “From parameters to portents—and back,” in Y. Elkanaet al. (eds.) Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators. New York: John Wiley.
