Steering the Course
Negotiating Directions in Alternative Research and Innovation Policies for Transformative Change
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.i7.97466Abstract
This paper explores how inclusive and environmentally focused research and innovation policies challenge dominant models by reshaping directionality and governance for social transformation. It contributes to Critical and Transformative Innovation Studies by addressing key intertwined gaps: the role of agency, the political economy of policy instruments, the politics of continuity, and its territorial grounding. Analytically, it expands a Knowledge Systems approach, promoting a broader, symmetrical view of innovation that values diverse actors, policies, infrastructures, and knowledges. It challenges competitiveness-driven assumptions by exploring how alternative normative directions are negotiated over time. Through two case studies in Argentina—Yogurito (a probiotic yogurt to address malnutrition) and the Paraná River Aquarium (focused on biodiversity conservation)—the paper traces innovation journeys as a process where multiple actors vie to steer its course. Directionality is framed as both a political process of prioritization and decision making amid competing interests and its negotiated outcome, shaped by actors’ visions, knowledge, and policy preferences. The paper also proposes a framework to empirically trace and analyze these evolving pathways. It shows how innovation is steered, which orientations take precedence, and the limits and possibilities of STI as a development driver under enduring structural constraints.
References
Aguiar, D., Davyt, A., & Nupia, C. M. (2017). Organizaciones internacionales y convergencia de política en ciencia, tecnología e innovación: El Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo en Argentina, Colombia y Uruguay (1979-2009). Redes. Revista de Estudios Sociales de la Ciencia y la Tecnología, 23(44), 15–49. https://ridaa.unq.edu.ar/bitstream/handle/20.500.11807/853/01-R2017v23n44.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Armitage, J. (2000). Paul Virilio: From modernism to hypermodernism and beyond. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446218242
Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2001). Changing knowledge production and Latin American universities. Research Policy, 30(8), 1221–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00143-8
Arza, V., & Brau, W. (2021). El péndulo en números. Desarrollo Económico, 61(233), 1–29. https://revistas.ides.org.ar/desarrollo-economico/article/view/133
Atela, J., Ndege, N., Marshall, F., Chataway, J., Frost, A., Hall, A., & Shee, A. (2021). Applying a transformative knowledge systems perspective to gain new insights for STI policy. In Building science systems in Africa (p. 86). https://suraadiq.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Building-Science-Systems-in-Africa_eFILE-2.pdf#page=105
Bandola-Gill, J., Arthur, M., Leng, & R. I. (2023). What is co-production? Conceptualising and understanding co-production of knowledge and policy across different theoretical perspectives. Evidence & Policy, 19(2), 275–298. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16420955772641
Boons, F., Batista-Navarro, R. (2021). Sustainable innovation: Analysing literature lineages. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, & D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (pp. 122–134). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.13169/prometheus.39.1.0057
Bortz, G. (2017). Biotecnologías para el desarrollo inclusivo y sustentable. Políticas públicas y estrategias de producción de conocimiento, desarrollo tecnológico e innovación para resolver problemas sociales y ambientales en Argentina (2007-2016) [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Buenos Aires]. https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/handle/11336/83200
Bortz, G., & Thomas, H. (2017). Biotechnologies for inclusive development: Scaling up, knowledge intensity and empowerment (the case of the probiotic yoghurt ‘Yogurito’ in Argentina). Innovation and Development, 7(1), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2017.1281206
Bortz, G., & Thomas, H. (2019). Parasites, bugs and banks: Problems and constraints in designing policies and technologies that transform R&D into healthcare solutions: The case of Chagas disease in Argentina (2007–2017). Innovation and Development, 9(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2019.1567904
Bortz, G. M., & Thomas, H. E. (2022). User theory for inclusion or exclusion? Conceptual models to address the role of users for inclusive socio-technical change. NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation, 3, 6–41. https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.v0i3.91144
Bulah, B. M., van Mierlo, B., Beumer, K., Gerritsen, A. L., Negro, S. O., Hekkert, M. P., & Klerkx, L. (2024). Diversity and directionality: Friends or foes in sustainability transitions? Science and Public Policy, 51(6), 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae044
Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., Jäger, J., & Mitchell, R. B. (2003). Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8086–8091. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231332100
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/papers/v86n0.825
Charmaz, K. (2016). The power of constructivist grounded theory for critical inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416657105
Cornwall, A., & Brock, K. (2005). What do buzzwords do for development policy? A critical look at ‘participation’, ‘empowerment’ and ‘poverty reduction’. Third World Quarterly, 26(7), 1043–1060. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590500235603
Cressman, D. (2019). Disruptive innovation and the idea of technology. NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation, (1), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.v0i1.91159
Daimer, S., Hufnagl, M., & Warnke, P. (2012). Challenge-oriented policy-making and innovation systems theory. In Innovation system revisited: Experiences from 40 years of Fraunhofer ISI research (pp. 217–234). https://publica-rest.fraunhofer.de/server/api/core/bitstreams/4b66d617-48c7-4a90-82f9-10abd4337bb5/content
de Graaff, S., Wanzenböck, I., & Frenken, K. (2025). The politics of directionality in innovation policy through the lens of policy process frameworks. Science and Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae083
Dias, R. B. (2013). Tecnologia social e desenvolvimento local: Reflexões a partir da análise do Programa Um Milhão de Cisternas. Revista Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Regional, 1(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.7867/2317-5443.2013v1n2p173-189
El Cronista. (2009, Octubre 22). Yogurito, una bebida contra la desnutrición. https://www.cronista.com/impresa-general/yogurito-una-bebida-contra-la-desnutricion/
El Siglo. (2013, Enero 24). Murió Guillermo Oliver, creador de la leche Bio y cofundador del Cerela. http://www.elsigloweb.com/nota/109057/murio-guillermo-oliver-creador-de-la-lechebio-y-cofundador-del-cerela.html
Edquist, C. (2004). Systems of innovation – a critical review of the state of the art. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), Handbook of innovation (pp. 181–208). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0007
Edwards-Schachter, M. (2021). Mapping innovation diversity. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, & D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (pp. 79–105). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789902303.00015
Frahm, N., Doezema, T., & Pfotenhauer, S. (2022). Fixing technology with society: The coproduction of democratic deficits and responsible innovation at the OECD and the European Commission. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(1), 174–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243921999100
Frost, A., Hall, A., Marshall, F., Atela, J., Ndege, N., Ciarli, T., Shee, A., Confraria, H., Dolley, J., & Chataway, J. (2020). Understanding knowledge systems and what works to promote science technology and innovation in Kenya, Tanzania and Rwanda (Final report). UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office East Africa Research and Innovation Hub. https://www.gov.uk/research-for-development-outputs/understanding-knowledge-systems-and-what-works-to-promote-science-technology-and-innovation-in-kenya-tanzania-and-rwanda
Gaglio, G., & Vinck, D. (2021). Collateral innovation: Renewing theory from case-studies. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, & D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (pp. 387–403). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Gaglio, G., Godin, B., & Pfotenhauer, S. (2019). X-innovation: Re-inventing innovation again and again. NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation, 1, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.v0i1.91158
Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4544562
Gázquez, A. (2024). Como pez contra la corriente. Producción de conocimiento, agendas de I+D y conservación de la biodiversidad en el Acuario del Río Paraná [Tesis de maestría, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes]. https://biblio.unq.edu.ar/qfind/Record/ir-20.500.11807-4790/Details
Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6–7), 897–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015
Geels, F. W., Hekkert, M. P., & Jacobsson, S. (2008). The dynamics of sustainable innovation journeys. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(5), 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802292982
Godin, B., Gaglio, G., & Vinck, D. (2021). Handbook on alternative theories of innovation. Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.13169/prometheus.39.1.0057
González, M. G. (2020). El Estado en acción: La incorporación de alimentos funcionales al Plan Alimentario en la Provincia de Tucumán. Cátedra Paralela, 17, 247–265. https://doi.org/10.35305/cp.vi17.65
Grillitsch, M., & Asheim, B. T. (2018). Place-based innovation policy for industrial diversification in regions. European Planning Studies, 26(8), 1638–1662. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2018.1484892
Gupta, A. K., Sinha, R., Koradia, D., Patel, R., Parmar, M., Rohit, P., Jafri, S., Chand, V. S., Shukla, S., Rademakers, L., Herbig, B., Sharma, S., & Chand, P. V. (2003). Mobilizing grassroots' technological innovations and traditional knowledge, values and institutions: Articulating social and ethical capital. Futures, 35(9), 975–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00053-3
Heeks, R., Foster, C., & Nugroho, Y. (2014). New models of inclusive innovation for development. Innovation and Development, 4(2), 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2014.928982
Hekkert, M. P., Janssen, M. J., Wesseling, J. H., & Negro, S. O. (2020). Mission-oriented innovation systems. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 76–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.011
Howaldt, J., Kaletka, C., Schröder, A., & Zirngiebl, M. (2019). Atlas of social innovation (2nd vol. A world of new practices). Oekom Verlag. https://www.oekom.de/_files_media/titel/leseproben/9783962381578.pdf
Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge. Abingdon, UK: Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413845
Joly, P.-B. (2010). On the economics of techno-scientific promises. In M. Akrich, Y. Barthe, F. Muniesa, P. Mustar (Eds.), Débordements: Mélanges offerts à Michel Callon (pp. 203–222). Presses des Mines. https://books.openedition.org/pressesmines/747
Kaplinsky, R. (2011). Schumacher meets Schumpeter: Appropriate technology below the radar. Research Policy, 40(2), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.003
Kivimaa, P., Laakso, S., Lonkila, A., & Kaljonen, M. (2021). Moving beyond disruptive innovation: A review of disruption in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 38, 110–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.12.001
La Gaceta. (2014, September 10). Lanzan un yogur probiótico tucumano. https://www.lagaceta.com.ar/nota/607251/economia/lanzan-yogur-probiotico-tucumano.html
Langlais, R., Mills, D., Moll, P., Otto, I. M., Petersen, A., Pohl, C., & van Kerkhoff, L. (2013). Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change. Environmental Science & Policy, 28, 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.11.008
Lascoumes, P., Le Galès, P. (2007). Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments—From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance, 20(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00342.x
Laurent, B. (2021). Ideology, engine or regime: Styles of critique and theories of innovation. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (pp. 369–386). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.13169/prometheus.39.1.0057
Leach, M., Reyers, B., Bai, X., Brondizio, E. S., Cook, C., Díaz, S., Espindola, G., Scobie, M., Stafford-Smith, M., & Subramanian, S. M. (2018). Equity and sustainability in the Anthropocene: A social–ecological systems perspective on their intertwined futures. Global Sustainability, 1, e13. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2018.12
Leach, M., Stirling, A. C., & Scoones, I. (2010). Dynamic sustainabilities: Technology, environment, social justice. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849775069
Lorenzano, C. (1995). Cerela, la leche que cura. Investigación y Desarrollo (I+D), 1(1).
Lubchenco, J. (1998). Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science. Science, 279(5350), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.279.5350.491
Lundvall, B.-Å. (Ed.). (2010). National Systems of Innovation: Toward a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Anthem Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1gxp7cs
Majone, G. (1989). Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process. Yale University Press. CT: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-04159-0. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300052596/evidence-argument-and-persuasion-in-the-policy-process/
Mazzucato, M. (2015). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. PublicAffairs. http://digamo.free.fr/mazzucato.pdf
Mazzucato, M. (2021). Mission economy: A moonshot guide to changing capitalism. Penguin UK. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwac042
Mulgan, G. (2006). The process of social innovation. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1162/itgg.2006.1.2.145
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2015). The Innovation Imperative: Contributing to Productivity, Growth and Well-being. Paris, France: OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-innovation-imperative_9789264239814-en.html
Oliver, G. (1994). Disertación del Académico Correspondiente, Dr. Guillermo Oliver. Las bacterias lácticas en simbiosis con mi vida. Anales de la Academia Nacional de Agronomía y Veterinaria, XLVIII, 14–23. http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/30324
Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751–760. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093
Peck, J. (2011). Geographies of policy: From transfer-diffusion to mobility-mutation. Progress in Human Geography, 35(6), 773–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510394010
Perdigón, G., Macías, M. E., Álvarez, S., Oliver, G., & Pesce de Ruiz Holgado, A. (1986a). Effect of perorally administered lactobacilli on macrophage activation in mice. Infection & Immunity, 53(2), 404–410. https://doi.org/10.11.28/iai.53.2.404-410.1186
Perdigón, G., Macías, M. E., Álvarez, S., Oliver, G., & Pesce de Ruiz Holgado, A. (1986b). Actividad inmunopotenciadora de bacterias lácticas administradas por vía oral. Su efecto beneficioso en diarreas infantiles. Medicina (Buenos Aires), 46(6), 751–754.
Pfotenhauer, S. M., Juhl, J., & Aarden, E. (2019). Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative. Research Policy, 48(4), 895–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.015
Pfotenhauer, S., & Jasanoff, S. (2017a). Traveling imaginaries: The “practice turn” in innovation policy and the global circulation of innovation models. In D. Tyfield, R. Lave, S. Randalls, & C. Thorpe (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of the political economy of science (pp. 416–428). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231207082
Pfotenhauer, S., & Jasanoff, S. (2017b). Panacea or diagnosis? Imaginaries of innovation and the ‘MIT model’ in three political cultures. Social Studies of Science, 47(6), 783–810. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717706110
Polanyi, M., Ziman, J., & Fuller, S. (2000). The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva, 38(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026552331313
Prahalad, C. K. (2010 [2004]). The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits. New Jersey: Wharton School Publishing. Radjou, N., Prabhu, J., Ahuja, S. (2012). Jugaad innovation: Think frugal, be flexible. https://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780137009275/samplepages/0137009275.pdf
Rip, A. (1994). The republic of science in the 1990s. Higher Education, 28(1), 3–23. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3447860
Schlaile, M. P., Urmetzer, S., Blok, V., Andersen, A. D., Timmermans, J., Mueller, M., Fagerberg, J., & Pyka, A. (2017). Innovation systems for transformations towards sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. Sustainability, 9(12), 2253. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122253
Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 1554–1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
Stirling, A. (2009). Direction, distribution and diversity! Pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and development. ISBN 978-1-85864-791-6. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/articles/report/Direction_Distribution_and_Diversity_Pluralising_Progress_in_Innovation_Sustainability_and_Development/26480443
Suárez, D., Erbes, A. (2021). What can national innovation systems do for development? Innovation and Development, 11(2–3), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1935641
Thomas, H., Becerra, L., Fressoli, M., Garrido, S., & Juarez, P. (2017). Theoretical and policy failures in technologies and innovation for social inclusion: The cases of social housing, renewable energy and food production in Argentina. In E. Kica & M. A. Heldeweg (Eds.), Research handbook on innovation governance for emerging economies (pp. 493–520). Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN: 978 1 78347 190 4. https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/usd/research-handbook-on-innovation-governance-for-emerging-economies-9781783471904.html
Tyfield, D., Lave, R., Randalls, & S., Thorpe, C. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge handbook of the political economy of science. Routledge. ISBN: 9780367581275.
Ureta, S. (2023). Experimentos políticos: Repensando la implementación de políticas públicas. Ediciones Universidad Alberto Hurtado. https://ediciones.uahurtado.cl/producto/experimentos-politicos/
van Kerkhoff, L., & Szlezák, N. A. (2016). The role of innovative global institutions in linking knowledge and action. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(17), 4603–4608.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900541107
Van Lente, H. (2021). Imaginaries of innovation. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, & D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (pp. 23–36). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.13169/prometheus.39.1.0057
Villena, J., Salva, S., Núñez, M., Corzo, J., Tolaba, R., Faedda, J., Font, G., & Álvarez, S. (2012). Probiotics for everyone! The novel immunobiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus CRL1505 and the beginning of social probiotic programs in Argentina. International Journal of Biotechnology for Wellness Industries, 1(3), 189–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.6000/1927-3037/2012.01.03.01
Winner, L. (2018). The cult of innovation: Its myths and rituals. In E. Subrahmanian (Ed.), Engineering a better future: Interplay between engineering, social sciences, and innovation (pp. 61–73). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91134-2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Gabriela Bortz, Ayelén Gázquez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
NOvation is an open-access journal under a Creative Commons – CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 license, which allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement (and preservation) of the author's authorship and intellectual property rights.
To this extent, the authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:
1. Authors retain the rights and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work published under the Creative Commons – CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 that allows [...].
2. Authors have authorization for distribution, of the version of the work published in this journal, in an institutional repository, thematic, databases and in other works as a book chapter, with acknowledgement of authorship and initial publication in the journal;
3. Papers published in this journal will be indexed in databases, repositories, portals, directories and other sources in which the journal is and will be indexed.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record.
Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work is submitted.
