A systematic review of the concept of innovation in humanities and social sciences

Subject Areas : Other

Elnaz Mesma Khosroshahi ¹ , Sepehr Ghazinoory ² , Mahdi Pakzad ³ , Abolghasem Sarabadani ⁴ , Parvaneh Aghaei ⁵

1 - Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Faculty of Management and Economics. Tarbiat Modares University. Tehran.Iran
3 - National Research Institute For Science Policy. Tehran.Iran
4 - Faculty of Management and Economics.Tarbiat Modares University.Tehran.Iran
5 - Faculty of Management and Economics. Tarbiat Modares University. Tehran. Iran

Received: 2024-02-03 Accepted : 2024-09-03 Published : 2024-10-12

Keywords: innovation, innovation in humanities and social sciences, value creation in humanities and social sciences, commercialization of humanities and social sciences, intrinsic value of humanities and social sciences,

Abstract :

Purpose: The main purpose of this research is to provide a definition of innovation in humanities and social science researches. Methodology: The current research is a systematic review of the concept of innovation in humanities and social sciences research based on the method proposed by Xiao and Watson (2019) and the analysis of 20 Persian and English sources during the years 2005 to 2023 using a 2-step coding method. Findings: According to the findings, "Creating a new theory or dealing with existing theories from another perspective", "Creating economic, spiritual, social, cultural and political values" and "Embodiment of value in individuals and society" can be respectively equivalent to the stages of "Idea-creating or creativity", "creating value" and "accepting innovation" in the innovation process of humanities and social science research. Conclusion: According to the findings, we consider the innovation in humanities and social science research to create economic, spiritual, social, cultural and political values through presenting new theories or addressing existing theories from a perspective. According to our findings, when these values are actualized, they become practical in individuals and society

References:

آقائی، پروانه؛ قاضی نوری، سید سپهر و پاکزاد بناب، مهدی (1401)، «مسیرهای مشارکت علوم انسانی و اجتماعی در بوم¬سازگان نوآوری: دلالت‌هایی برای خط‌مشی‌گذاری»، مطالعات مدیریت دولتی ایران، سال پنجم، شماره 4، 64-31.
برزگر، سیروس؛ مرادی، علی و جعفری¬نیا، غلامرضا (1401)، «شناخت رابطه بین علوم انسانی و توسعه فرهنگی در ایران: موردمطالعه شهر بوشهر»، مطالعات توسعه اجتماعی- فرهنگی، دوره دهم، شماره 4، 103-71.
پناهی، محمدحسین (1394)، «توسعه فرهنگی ضرورت توسعه اقتصادي، اجتماعی و سیاسی»، برنامه‌ریزی رفاه و توسعه اجتماعی، دوره ششم، شماره 22، 23-1.
عسکری، حسین؛ چهاردولی، عباس؛ پیروزمند، علیرضا؛ تاج¬آبادی، حسین و رضایی، حمیدرضا (1400)، «ارزیابی انتقادی مفهوم تجاری¬سازی در علوم انسانی موجود»، تحقیقات بنیادین علوم انسانی، دوره هفتم، شماره 2، 11-40.
قلی¬پور، حسین و چیت‌سازیان، علیرضا (1396)، «ابعاد و مؤلفه‌های تحول در علوم انسانی در اندیشه مقام معظم رهبری»، راهبرد فرهنگ، دوره دهم، شماره 36، 124-97.
کسرایی، محمد سالار و اصغری، بهزاد (1401)، «الگوي تعامل علوم انساني و اجتماعي با مفهوم توسعه»، جامعه پژوهشی فرهنگی، دوره سیزدهم، شماره 46، 126-101.
گلحسنی، حمید؛ حسینی، طاهره و حسن¬زاده، محمد (1400)، «چالش¬های اثربخشی تحقیقات در علوم انسانی و اجتماعی در ایران: تحلیلی داده بنیاد»، علوم و فنون مدیریت اطلاعات، دوره هفتم، شماره 2، 174-144.
محمودپور، بختیار؛ رحیمیان، حمید؛ عباس¬پور، عباس و دلاور، علی (1391)، «واکاوی چالش¬های فراروی تجاری¬سازی تحقیقات علوم انسانی و ارائه یک نظر زمینه‌ای»، ابتکار و خلاقیت در علوم انسانی، دوره دوم، شماره 2، 49-19.
موسوی، آرش (1394)، «نظام نوآوری در علوم انسانی»، روش¬شناسی علوم انسانی، دوره بیست و یکم، شماره 82، 169-143.
نریمانی، امیررضا و واعظی، رضا (1396)، «شناسایی عوامل تسهیلگر تجاری‌سازی پژوهش‌های دانش مدیریت دولتی»، مدیریت دولتی، دوره نهم، شماره 2، 262-235.
نریمانی، امیررضا؛ واعظی، رضا؛ الوانی، مهدی و قربانی¬زاده، وجه الله (1396)، «شناسایی عوامل و موانع برون‌سازمانی دانشگاه در تجاری¬سازی پژوهش¬های علوم انسانی»، فرایند مدیریت توسعه، سال سی¬ام، شماره 1، 110-81.
Academy, B. (2010). Past, Present and Future: The Public Value of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of management, 40(5), 1297-1333.
Arts, & Council, H. R. (2009). Leading the World. The Economic Impact of UK Arts and Humanities Research. In: AHRC Swindon.
Bakhshi, H., Schneider, P., & Walker, C. (2009). Arts and humanities research in the innovation system: The UK example. Cultural Science Journal, 2(1).
Bakhshi, H., Schneider, P., & Walker, C. (2008). Arts and humanities research and innovation.
Belfiore, E. (2015). ‘Impact’,‘value’and ‘bad economics’: Making sense of the problem of value in the arts and humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 95-110.
Belfiore, E., & Bennett, O. (2010). Beyond the “Toolkit Approach”: arts impact evaluation research and the realities of cultural policy‐making. Journal for cultural research, 14(2), 121-142.
Benneworth, P. (2015). Tracing how arts and humanities research translates, circulates and consolidates in society... How have scholars been reacting to diverse impact and public value agendas? Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 45-60.
Blue, G. (2016). Framing climate change for public deliberation: What role for interpretive social sciences and humanities?. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(1), 67-84.
Bührer, S., Feidenheimer, A., Walz, R., Lindner, R., Beckert, B., & Wallwaey, E. (2022). Concepts and methods to measure societal impacts: An overview.
Castro Martínez, E., Molas Gallart, J., & Olmos Peñuela, J. (2010). Knowledge transfer in the social sciences and the humanities: Informal links in a public research organization.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
Curley, M., Salmelin, B., Curley, M., & Salmelin, B. (2018). The evolution of innovation. In Open Innovation 2.0: The New Mode of Digital Innovation for Prosperity and Sustainability. Springer.
Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2006). Phases of the adoption of innovation in organizations: effects of environment, organization and top managers 1. British journal of Management, 17(3), 215-236.
Das, K., & Paital, B. (2021). Future call for policy making to speed up interdisciplinarity between natural and social sciences and humanities in countries such as India. Heliyon, 7(3).
Gascoigne, T., & Metcalfe, J. (2005). Commercialisation of research activities in the humanities, arts and social sciences in Australia. Council for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences.
Gault, F. (2018). Defining and measuring innovation in all sectors of the economy. Research policy, 47(3), 617-622.
Godin, B. (2008). In the shadow of Schumpeter: W. Rupert Maclaurin and the study of technological innovation. Minerva, 46(3), 343-360.
Goswami, S., & Mathew, M. (2005). Definition of innovation revisited: An empirical study on Indian information technology industry. International Journal of Innovation Management, 9(03), 371-383.
Hazelkorn, E., Ryan, M., Gibson, A., & Ward, E. (2013). Recognising the Value of the Arts and Humanities in a Time of Austerity.
Holm, P., Jarrick, A., & Scott, D. (2015). Humanities world report 2015. Springer Nature.
Lafley, A. G., & Charan, R. (2010). The game changer: How every leader can drive everyday innovation. Profile Books.
Levitt, R., Celia, C., Diepeveen, S., Chonaill, S. N., Rabinovich, L., & Tiessen, J. (2010). Assessing the Impact of Arts and Humanities Research at the University of Cambridge. Technical Report. RAND Corporation.
Lundström, A., & Zhou, C. (2011). Promoting innovation based on social sciences and technologies: the prospect of a social innovation park. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 24(1-2).
Manual, F. (2015). The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities-Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Paris: OECD Publishing.
Olmos-Peñuela, J., Benneworth, P., & Castro-Martínez, E. (2015). Are sciences essential and humanities elective? Disentangling competing claims for humanities’ research public value. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 61-78.
Olmos-Peñuela, J., Molas-Gallart, J., & Castro-Martínez, E. (2014). Informal collaborations between social sciences and humanities researchers and non-academic partners. Science and public policy, 41(4).
Perrin, B. (2002). How to—and how not to—evaluate innovation. Evaluation, 8(1), 13-28.
Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (1999). The New Challenge to America’s Prosperity: Findings from the Innovation Index, Council on Competitiveness. Washington, DC.
Reale, E., Avramov, D., Canhial, K., Donovan, C., Flecha, R., Holm, P., Larkin, C., Lepori, B., Mosoni-Fried, J., & Oliver, E. (2018). A review of literature on evaluating the scientific, social and political impact of social sciences and humanities research. Research evaluation, 27(4), 298-308.
Reed, M. S., Ferré, M., Martin-Ortega, J., Blanche, R., Lawford-Rolfe, R., Dallimer, M., & Holden, J. (2021). Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework. Research policy, 50(4), 104147.
Roberts, E. B. (2007). Managing invention and innovation. Research-Technology Management, 50(1), 35-54.
Robson, J., Murphy, E., Nuseibeh, N., Tawell, A., Hart, B., Stewart, J., Keep, E., & Marginson, S. (2023). The value of the humanities: understanding the career destinations of Oxford humanities graduates.
Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field methods, 15(1), 85-109.
Singh, S., & Aggarwal, Y. (2022). In search of a consensus definition of innovation: A qualitative synthesis of 208 definitions using grounded theory approach. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 35(2), 177-195.
Spaapen, J., & Sivertsen, G. (2020). Assessing societal impact of SSH in an engaging world: focus on productive interaction, creative pathways and enhanced visibility of SSH research. Research Evaluation, 29(1), 1-3.
Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128-146.
The Impact Group, T. I. (2008). The Economic Role and Influence of the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Conjecture. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).
van Dinter, R., Tekinerdogan, B., & Catal, C. (2021). Automation of systematic literature reviews: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 136, 106589.
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of planning education and research, 39(1)