Voices on the upcoming 2024 Research and Innovation Bill: EUGENIA PEREZ VICO – “The world is not necessarily better off with more excellence”

Eugenia Perez Vico is Associate Professor of Innovation Science at Halmstad University and an expert on research policy. She studies the role of research and researchers in societal transitions, something she has also worked with specifically at several authorities – including the innovation agency Vinnova.

What are your hopes for the bill?

– I hope that the different types of research and researcher roles will be taken into account and that the conditions will be created for them to function as a whole so that the knowledge we produce in academia can benefit society on a broad front. This does not mean that all research should have direct relevance to society. But the one-sided way in which the government communicates about excellence – that it is highly cited research articles that are of value – is a step back to a very simplified picture of how research works in society.

How do you mean?

– There is no inherent value in excellence. Just because we have excellence does not make the world a better place. We know that it is a long and winding road from having new knowledge put into practice. While we need high-quality research for societal benefit, it is difficult to predict which research will be relevant, as this changes with societal needs over time. But getting research out into society requires a lot of support from and collaboration with different knowledge and collaboration actors, and also engagement and reflection from researchers themselves. It is extremely important that this is taken into account in the research and innovation bill.

What is needed for the development of innovation and entrepreneurship in Sweden?

– Firstly, what I have been talking about, the networks and connections between different types of researchers and society. To believe that a lot of innovations that create growth will automatically come out, just by the government investing in excellence in science and technology research, is misguided. Because, like excellence, there is no intrinsic value in innovation and entrepreneurship. It is not always a good thing, but rather one of many reasons for the climate crisis we are in the midst of.

– Both innovation and entrepreneurship should be a means rather than an end. We need to foster quality innovation and entrepreneurship leading to broader societal values, and we cannot only focus on science and technology.

– To avoid locking ourselves into further resource dependency with new innovations, we need reflection and guiding mechanisms around innovation and entrepreneurship. And this can be found in the social sciences and humanities – so society needs to invest heavily in these disciplines too.

It sounds obvious what you’re saying, so it’s hard to believe that policy makers wouldn’t think so?

– There are strong voices that argue that it is pure free and excellent research that leads society forward. And unfortunately, this perspective seems to permeate the upcoming research and innovation bill in an unbalanced way. Unfortunately, it does not reflect the development of knowledge in recent decades about how research benefits society.

Contact eugenia.perez@hh.se

Read more voices on the Research and Innovation Bill:
Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn, Vice-Chancellor at Luleå University of Technology

Mats Benner, Professor of Research Policy at Lund University

Read interview with Minister of Education Johan Pehrson