Classification of Demand-Side Instruments for the Application of Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) Research: A Logical Model

Document Type : Research paper

Authors

1 PhD Candidate, Science and Technology Policymaking, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Science and Technology Policy, National Science Policy Research Institute, Tehran, Iran

4 Assistant Professor of Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran: Iran

Abstract

Despite the societal benefits of the humanities and social sciences (HSS), these fields face market and system failures due to insufficient engagement with beneficiaries and limited awareness of market needs; that is, researchers remain unaware of the actual demand of society, while potential users are equally unfamiliar with the services and products these disciplines can provide. The vital role of HSS in addressing grand societal challenges, along with the necessity of demonstrating their capacity to generate economic value in addition to long-term benefits, justifies the classification of demand-side innovation policy instruments for their practical application. Considering the non-academic benefits of HSS in both social and political dimensions, and the dual necessity of market development for social benefits and market creation for political benefits, this article undertakes a systematic literature review and codes the findings of 37 sources within a logical model (examining the outputs, outcomes, and impacts of demand-side instruments, and their roles in developing or creating innovation markets) to classify demand-side instruments for the application of HSS research. The instruments are analyzed in four categories: “public demand,” “stimulating private demand,” “regulation,” and “systemic approaches.” According to the findings, stimulating private demand through cultural vouchers, marketing support schemes, and protective regulatory measures can foster market development in these fields, enhance sales and revenues, and increase the share of cultural and artistic products in the economy. Likewise, public demand instruments—such as networking between policymakers and researchers (to stimulate private demand), embedding researchers in policymaking bodies (regulation), and funding problem-oriented projects as contracted research and development (systemic approaches)— enable market creation for the political benefits of HSS. Unlike technological innovation, researchers in this process are required to actively participate from the outset through to the formulation of policy solutions. The reinterpretation of instruments must emphasize three key criteria—sustained participation, long-term orientation, and a focus on intangible values such as institutional analysis—so that policy instruments can effectively contribute to policymaking. The design and implementation of such instruments will help translate the contributions of HSS into tangible outcomes and ultimately bridge the gap between research and demand, while simultaneously empowering HSS researchers to demonstrate their value and secure research funding.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Abbaspour, A., Ghorbani Paji, A., & Namvar Arabani, Z. (2023). Soft modeling of factors affecting the commercialization of humanities. Iranian Higher Education, 14(4), 35-54. (Persian) DOI: 20.1001.1.20088000.1401.14.4.3.0
Aghaei, P., Ghazinoory, S. S., & Pakzad Bonab, M. (2022). Humanities and social sciences participation channels in innovation ecosystems: Implications for policy making. Journal of Iranian Public Administration Studies, 5(4), 31-64. (Persian). DOI: 10.22034/jipas.2023.343752.1403.
Albano, G. L., & Sparro, M. (2010). Flexible strategies for centralized public procurement. Review of Economics and Institutions, 1(2), 1-32. DOI: 10.5202/rei.v1i2.17
Alizadeh, P., Safdari Ranjbar, M., & Fartash, K. (2021). An Investigation into the Maximum Utilization of National Production and Service Capacity Act. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 14(1), 55-70. (Persian) DOI: 10.22034/jstp.2021.13887
Aschhoff, B., & Sofka, W. (2009). Innovation on demand—Can public procurement drive market success of innovations? Research policy, 38(8), 1235-1247. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.011
Bakhshi, H., Schneider, P., & Walker, C. (2009). Arts and humanities research in the innovation system: The UK example. Cultural Science Journal, 2(1), 1-23. DOI:10.5334/csci.19.
Bleda, M., & Chicot, J. (2020). The role of public procurement in the formation of markets for innovation. Journal of Business Research, 107, 186-196. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.032.
Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435-447. DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scy014.
Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513-1522. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002.
Braesemann, F., & Marpe, M. (2023). How to foster innovation in the social sciences? Qualitative evidence from focus group workshops at Oxford University. arXiv:2309.06875. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.06875
British Academy. (2008 September). Punching our weight: The humanities and social sciences in public policy making. Retrieved from: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://heranet.info/assets/uploads/2017/11/Punching-our-weight-the-humanities-and-social-sciences-in-public-policy-making-British-Academy.pdf
British Academy. (2010). Past, present and future: The public value of the humanities and social sciences. London: British Academy.
Brogaard, L. (2017). Innovation and value in pre-commercial procurement: A systematic evaluation of national experiences. Journal of Strategic Contracting and Negotiation, 3(3), 137-156. DOI: 10.1177/2055563618799065.
Chang, K. C., Lin, W. M., & Chung, K. M. (2015). Incentives to using solar thermal energy in Taiwan. Renewables: Wind, Water, and Solar, 2(1), 8. DOI: 10.1186/s40807-015-0008-y
Changalima, I. A., & Mchopa, A. D. (2024). Trends in public procurement and innovation: A bibliometric analysis and future research agenda. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 89(3), 224-252. DOI: 10.1108/SAMAMJ-07-2024-0037
Chicot, J., & Matt, M. (2018). Public procurement of innovation: a review of rationales, designs, and contributions to grand challenges. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 480-492. DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scy012.
Coates Ulrichsen, T., & Athanassopoulou, N. (2024). Commercialising social science research: Insights from the University of Cambridge on key barriers, enablers and pathways to success. Retrieved from: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/items/7be2b988-2c81-46e0-8d0f-606eb23bdef6 DOI: 10.17863/CAM.107657
Costantini, V., Crespi, F., Martini, C., & Pennacchio, L. (2015). Demand-pull and technology-push public support for eco-innovation: The case of the biofuels sector. Research Policy, 44(3), 577-595. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.12.011.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
Delina, R., Gróf, M., & Dráb, R. (2021). Understanding the determinants and specifics of pre-commercial procurement. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(2), 80-100. DOI:10.4067/S0718-18762021000200107
Edler, J. (2013). Review of policy measures to stimulate private demand for innovation. Concepts and effects. Compendium of Evidence on The Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention, 13, 44.
Edler, J., & Georghiou, L. (2007). Public procurement and innovation—Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), 949-963. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.003
Edquist, C. (2015). Innovation-related public procurement as a demand-oriented innovation policy instrument (No. 2015/28). Lund University, CIRCLE-Centre for Innovation Research.
Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2012). Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41(10), 1757-1769. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.022.
Edquist, C., & Zabala‐Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2015). Pre‐commercial procurement: a demand or supply policy instrument in relation to innovation? R&D Management, 45(2), 147-160. DOI: 10.1111/radm.12057.
Fakour, B., Hajihoseini, H., & Ansari, M. T. (2018). Innovation-oriented public procurement: An important instrument of demand side innovation policy. Rahyaft, 28(71), 83-98. (Persian)
Fartash, K., & Khayatyan, M. S. (2024). An analysis of the imperatives to enhance Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI) to support knowledge-based companies in the water and power industry of Iran. Quarterly Journal of Governance Knowledge, 2(2), 60-97. (Persian) DOI: 10.22034/jokog.2024.201820.
Georghiou, L., Edler, J., Uyarra, E., & Yeow, J. (2014). Policy instruments for public procurement of innovation: Choice, design and assessment. Technological forecasting and social change, 86, 1-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.018
Gharanfoli, M., & Rabbani, M. (2022). Market development and reviving knowledge and skills in indigenous and creative industries. Science Cultivation, 12(2), 142-149. (Persian) DOI:  20.1001.1.2008935.1401.12.2.6.8
Ghazinoory, S., Farazkish, M., Nasri, S., & Mardani, A. (2023). Designing a Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) evaluation dashboard: A comprehensive and multidimensional approach. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 35(8), 1005-1023.‏ DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2021.1990877
Ghazinoory, S., Mesma Khosroshahi, E., Sarabadani, A., Pakzad, M., & Fatemi, M. (2025). How does Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) research benefit society? Research Evaluation, 34, rvaf016. DOI: 10.1093/reseval/rvaf016
Ghazinoory, S., Sajadifar, M., & mohammad hashemi, Z. (2020). Providing a logic model of fiscal and tax policy instruments on the law for supporting Knowledge-Based Firms (KBFs). Rahyaft, 29(4), 67-84. (Persian) DOI: 10.22034/rahyaft.2020.13799
Golhasany, H., Hosseini, T., & Hassanzadeh, M. (2021). Challenges to creating impact in humanities and social sciences in Iran: A Grounded Theory analysis. Sciences and Techniques of Information Management, 7(2), 141-174. (Persian) DOI: 10.22091/stim.2020.5770.1415
Goudarzi, R., Hosseini, S. R., & Tabaian, S. K. (2019). Academic entrepreneurship development framework in the Humanities in Iran. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 11(4), 661-679. (Persian) DOI: 10.22059/jed.2019.272159.652843
Guerzoni, M., & Raiteri, E. (2015). Demand-side vs. supply-side technology policies: Hidden treatment and new empirical evidence on the policy mix. Research Policy, 44(3), 726-747. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.009
Hannon, M. J., Foxon, T. J., & Gale, W. F. (2015). ‘Demand pull’government policies to support Product-Service System activity: The case of Energy Service Companies (ESCos) in the UK. Journal of cleaner production, 108, 900-915. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.082
Hazelkorn, E., Ryan, M., Gibson, A., & Ward, E. (2013). Recognising the value of the Arts and Humanities in a time of austerity. Retrieved from: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=cserrep
Holm, P., Jarrick, A., & Scott, D. (2015). Humanities world report 2015. Berlin: Springer Nature.
Iossa, E., Biagi, F., & Valbonesi, P. (2018). Pre-commercial procurement, procurement of innovative solutions and innovation partnerships in the EU: Rationale and strategy. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 27(8), 730-749. DOI:10.1080/10438599.2017.1402431
Jooriyan, N., Siavashi, E., Noori, J., & Abbasi, M. (2017). Identifying demand- driven policy instruments and locating instruments in the stages of product life cycle. Journal of Technology Development Management, 5(3), 61-82. (Persian) DOI: 10.22104/jtdm.2018.2326.1793
Kalu, M. E., & Norman, K. E. (2018). Step by step process from logic model to case study method as an approach to educational programme evaluation. Global Journal of Educational Research, 17(1), 73-85. DOI:10.4314/gjedr.v17i1.10
Kelly, C. J., & Young, A. J. (2017). Promoting innovation in healthcare. Future Healthcare Journal, 4(2), 121-125. DOI: 10.7861/futurehosp.4-2-121
Keohane, N. O., Revesz, R. L., & Stavins, R. N. (2019). The choice of regulatory instruments in environmental policy. Environmental law, 491-545. DOI:10.4324/9781315194288-10
Kundu, O., James, A. D., & Rigby, J. (2020). Public procurement and innovation: A systematic literature review. Science and Public Policy, 47(4), 490-502. DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scaa029
Mahmoudpour, B., Rahimian, H., Abbaspour, A., & Delavar, A. (2012). Recognition of challenges facing the commercialization research in humanities with present a grounded theory. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 3(3), 1-25. (Persian)
Mehrabi, G., abbaspour, A., Delavar, A., & Khorsandi Taskooh, A. (2022). Identifying the factors contributing to quality of academic research in humanities and social sciences. Journal of Research in Educational Systems, 16(56), 5-21. (Persian)
Mesma- Khosroshahi, E., Ghazinoory, S., Pakzad, M., Sarabadani, A., & Aghaei, P. (2024). A systematic review of the concept of innovation in humanities and social sciences. Journal of Innovation and Creativity in Human Science, 14(53), 26-52. (Persian)
Mohseni Kiasari, M., Mohammadi, M., Jafarnejad, A., Garousi Mokhtarzadeh, N., & Asadifard, R. (2017). Classification of demand-based innovation policy tools using meta-synthesis approach. Innovation Management Journal, 6(2), 109-138. (Persian) DOI: 20.1001.1.20080840.1398.12.2.33.8
Moridi, M.R., & Taqizadegan, M. (2011). Policymaking and social planning for the development of economic activities in the cultural sector: Evaluation of mega-plans to boost the Iranian art market in the 2000s. Iranian Sociological Studies, 1(2), 109-131. (persian)
Mousavi, A. (2015). Innovation system in humanities sciences. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities, 21(82), 143-169. (Persian)
Myoken, Y. (2010). Demand-orientated policy on leading-edge industry and technology: Public procurement for innovation. International Journal of Technology Management, 49(1-3), 196-219. DOI:10.1504/IJTM.2010.029418
Narimani, M., Remezani, H., & Shalbafi, M. (2020). Using government procurement policy tool in Iran: Pre-commercial public procurement for innovation or government procurement for supporting innovation? (A multi case study at the center for national macro technology projects). Journal of Technology Development Management, 8(1), 127-151. (Persian) ‏DOI: 10.22104/jtdm.2020.3575.2240
Noori, J., karimi, T., & Jooriyan, N. (2021). A framework for leveraging government procurement in technology and innovation development. Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 11(39), 2-22. (Persian) ‏
Obwegeser, N., & Müller, S. D. (2018). Innovation and public procurement: Terminology, concepts, and applications. Technovation, 74-45, 1-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2018.02.015
Patrucco, A. S., Luzzini, D., & Ronchi, S. (2017). Research perspectives on public procurement: Content analysis of 14 years of publications in the journal of public procurement. Journal of Public Procurement, 17(2), 229-269. DOI: 10.1108/JOPP-17-02-2017-B003
Pedersen, D. B., Grønvad, J. F., & Hvidtfeldt, R. (2020). Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities— A literature review. Research Evaluation, 29(1), 4-21. Doi:10.1093/reseval/rvz033
Raymond, J. (2008). Benchmarking in public procurement. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 15(6), 782-793. DOI: 10.1108/14635770810915940
Razavi, M. R., Daneshkohan, H., & Boushehri, A. (2019). A framework for effective factors of designing public procurement policy for innovation and technology development in IRAN. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 12(4), 63-75. (Persian) DOI: jstp.2020.11.4.1116
Reale, E., Avramov, D., Canhial, K., Donovan, C., Flecha, R., Holm, P., ... & Van Horik, R. (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. DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvx025
Reale, E., Primeri, E., Flecha, R., Soler, M., Oliver, E., Puigvert, L., & Donovan, C. (2014). Report 1. State of the art in the scientific, policy and social impact of SSH research and its evaluation.
Reyes-Mercado, P., Angeles, A., & Larios-Hernández, G. J. (2020). Demand-oriented innovation policy: Mapping the field and proposing a research agenda for developing countries. Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business, 5(1), 158-181. DOI:10.1344/jesb2020.1.j071
Robertson, M., Gottschalk, T., & Wheeler, J. (2024). The CARL library impact framework: A logic model approach to impact assessment for research libraries. Partnership, 18(2), 1-16. DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v18i2.7612
Rocha, F. (2019). Does public procurement for innovation increase innovative efforts? The case of Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, 18(01), 37-62. DOI: 10.20396/rbi.v18i1.8653575
Schmidt, J. O., Ensor, T., Hossain, A., & Khan, S. (2010). Vouchers as demand side financing instruments for health care: A review of the Bangladesh maternal voucher scheme. Health Policy, 96(2), 98-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.01.008
Sönnichsen, S. D., & Clement, J. (2020). Review of green and sustainable public procurement: Towards circular public procurement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 118901. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118901
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. DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvz035
Taqizadeh Kerman, N., Hosseinqolizadeh, R., & Javidi Kalate Ja’farabadi, T. (2015). A pathological study of knowledge creation in humanities research centers. Strategy for Culture, 8(30), 161-188. (Persian)
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 1-10. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Uyarra, E., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M., Flanagan, K., & Magro, E. (2020). Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation. Research Policy, 49(1), 1-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103844
Wahba, S., & Chun, Y. (2022). Orange is the new colour of city competitiveness: The role of local governments in promoting cultural and creative industries. Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal, 15(2), 136-149.
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93-112. DOI: 10.1177/0739456X17723971
Yazdi, N., & Maleki, A. (2019). Demand-side innovation policies, with an emphasis on Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI). Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 12(2), 481-494. (Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics