Search results

Research excellency has long been the dominant paradigm in assessing academic quality and hence a prime determinant of academic careers. Lately, this approach to academic performance has come under higher scrutiny for its narrow focus on the individual, promoted an exclusive, performance-oriented talent management and inhibiting collaboration, transparency and societal involvement.

As a response to the limitations of the excellency policy, this chapter examines the emergence of open science as a transformative force in the academic world. Open science represents a paradigm shift, emphasizing the importance of transparency, and increased societal engagement in the academic process. It opens up the possibility to include the context dimension, multiple stakeholders and a more diverse set of development and performance indicators.

This chapter stresses the urgent need to realign our system of recognition and rewards with the premise of open science and with talent management. By highlighting the disconnect between current recognition mechanisms and the values of universities, this chapter emphasizes the necessity of transformative changes at institutional and systemic levels.

To provide concrete insights into the implementation of these changes, this chapter explores a case study of Utrecht University. This specific example showcases how strategic decisions at an institute level allow navigation of the complexities of recognizing and rewarding open science practices. The Utrecht University case study serves as an inspiration for other institutions seeking to embrace open science and adapt their policies and practices accordingly.

This article revisits some theories and concepts of public administration, including those related to public value, transaction costs and social equity, to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of using artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in public service delivery. The author seeks to mobilize theory to guide AI-era public management practitioners and researchers.

The author uses an existing task classification model to mobilize and juxtapose public management theories against artificial intelligence potential impacts in public service delivery. Theories of social equity and transaction costs as well as some concepts such as red tape, efficiency and economy are used to argue that the discipline of public administration provides a foundation to ensure algorithms are used in a way that improves service delivery.

After presenting literature on the challenges and promises of using AI in public service, the study shows that while the adoption of algorithms in public service has benefits, some serious challenges still exist when looked at under the lenses of theory. Additionally, the author mobilizes the public administration concepts of agenda setting and coproduction and finds that designing AI-enabled public services should be centered on citizens who are not mere customers. As an implication for public management practice, this study shows that bringing citizens to the forefront of designing and implementing AI-delivered services is key to reducing the reproduction of social biases.

As a fast-growing subject, artificial intelligence research in public management is yet to empirically test some of the theories that the study presented.

The paper vulgarizes some theories of public administration which practitioners can consider in the design and implementation of AI-enabled public services. Additionally, the study shows practitioners that bringing citizens to the forefront of designing and implementing AI-delivered services is key to reducing the reproduction of social biases.

The paper informs a broad audience who might not be familiar with public administration theories and how those theories can be taken into consideration when adopting AI systems in service delivery.

This research is original, as, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no prior work has combined these concepts in analyzing AI in the public sector.

Transaction cost economics sees a broad spectrum of governance structures spanned by two types of economic adaptation: autonomous and cooperative. Stakeholder theorists have drawn much inspiration from transaction cost economics but have not paid explicit attention to the centrality of the idea of adaptation in this literature. This study aims to address this gap.

The authors develop a novel conceptual framework applying the distinction between the two types of economic adaptation to stakeholder theory.

The authors argue that the idea of cooperative adaptation is particularly useful for describing the firm’s collaboration with primary stakeholders in the joint value creation process. In contrast, autonomous adaptation is more relevant for firms interacting with secondary stakeholders who are not directly engaged in joint value creation and may not have formal contractual relationships with the firm. Accordingly, cooperative adaptation can be seen as vital for resolving team production problems affecting joint value creation, whereas autonomous adaptation addresses how the firm maintains legitimacy within the larger stakeholder environment.

Similar to its significance for transaction cost economics, the distinction between the two types of adaptation equips stakeholder theory with a new systematic understanding of a potentially broad spectrum of firm–stakeholder collaboration forms.

This paper aims to investigate how actors in the farmer’s network influence the adoption of smart farming technology (SFT) and to understand how social media affects this adoption process, in particular focusing on the influence of social media on trust in knowledge dissemination within the network.

The methodology used a two-stage process, with semi-structured interviews of farmers, augmented by a netnographic approach appropriate to the social media context.

The analysis illustrates the key role of the farmer network in the dissemination of SFT knowledge, bringing insight into an important B2B context. While social media emerges as a valuable way to connect farmers and promote discussion, it remains underused in knowledge dissemination on SFT. Also, farmers exhibit more trust in the content from peers online rather than from SFT vendors.

Novel insights are gained into the influence of the farming network on the accelerated adoption of SFT, including the potential role of social media in mitigating the homophilous nature of peer-to-peer interactions among farmers through exposure to more diverse actors and information. The use of a social network theory lens has provided new insights into the role of trust in shaping social media influence on the farmer, with variances in farmer trust of information from technology vendors and from peers.

To develop a framework for estimating the economic benefits of an accessible and inclusive society and implement it for the Canadian context. The framework measures the gap between the current situation in terms of accessibility and inclusiveness, and a counterfactual scenario of a fully accessible and inclusive society.

The method consists of three steps. First, the conceptual framework was developed based on a literature review and expert knowledge. Second, the magnitudes for each domain of the framework was estimated for the reference year 2017 using data from various sources. Third, several sensitivity analyses were run using different assumptions and scenarios.

It was estimated that moving to a fully accessible and inclusive society would create a value of $337.7bn (with a range of $252.8–$422.7bn) for Canadian society in the reference year of 2017. This is a sizeable proportion of gross domestic product (17.6%, with a range of 13.1–22.0%) and is likely a conservative estimate of the potential benefits.

Understanding the magnitude of the economic benefits of an accessible and inclusive society can be extremely useful for governments, disability advocates and industry leaders as it provides invaluable information on the benefits of efforts, such as legislation, policies, programs and practices, to improve accessibility and inclusion of persons with disabilities. Furthermore, the total economic benefits and the benefits per person with a disability can serve as inputs in economic evaluations and impact assessments.