In its effort to boost knowledge valorisation practices, the new EC report presents a comprehensive framework to measure the impact of R&I performance.
Is knowledge generated from research and innovation benefiting our society? Assessing the performance of knowledge valorisation (KV) activities helps enhance the economic and societal impact of research and innovation (R&I). This measurement is also essential to highlight the added value of R&I. The need to elevate KV has been politically recognised as it is one of the 11 structural policies of the ERA Policy Agenda 2025-2027. In the current context of enhancing European competitiveness, fostering greater KV efforts could help the EU address its current gaps and overcome hurdles in effectively translating research and innovation outcomes into concrete measures that create both societal and economic value. The newest EC report fits into this endeavour of creating value out of knowledge and its commitment to retaining these values within the EU internal market. This report provides a new framework to measure KV as these practices are fragmented across EU Member States (MS) and associated countries of the ERA, and current indicators struggle to capture the full scope of the performance. The EC acknowledges the need to adopt a holistic and harmonised approach to grasp the true added value of knowledge in our society.
To begin, KV is “the process of creating societal and economic value from knowledge”. According to the report, this process can be achieved through 7 different channels: i. academia-industry collaboration and mobility, ii. creation of research-driven spin-offs and startups, iii. intermediaries and knowledge transfer professionals support, iv. engagement of citizens, public bodies and societal actors, v. intellectual property management, vi. standardisation, and vii. policy uptake. The new framework goes beyond traditional measurement, which is limited to a few channels and indicators, and promotes an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach across various disciplines and stakeholders. This framework also encompasses both economic and societal benefits of these values. While economic benefits are easier to measure, societal benefits are more ambiguous to capture. However, the study’s stance emphasises the importance of taking both aspects into account to grasp every nuance of KV practices across MS and associated countries. Ultimately, R&I solutions truly make an impact when the generated outputs are transferred between stakeholders and are being used – when value is effectively translated into practice.
The new framework defines KV as “a multi-channel, multi-actor and multi-outcome process, and that no single dataset or linear chain of events can capture its complexity”. Indeed, it is worth mentioning that R&I outcomes create value through numerous pathways and there is no single route. Building on this foundation, the new set of measurement includes 16 indicators and 41 metrics, aiming to touch as accurately as possible on all seven channels. Moreover, as the study reminds us that KV is multi-layered and varies across disciplines, these indicators are chosen to represent as best as possible the reality of R&I ecosystems – where different practices are intertwined. Hence, valorisation is a result of interaction between different actors, systems and activities. Collaboration and cooperation are not options, but necessities.
Since the level of KV development differs across countries, the framework introduces a way to capture results by their maturity level, allowing for more precise and flexible measurements than only considering final outcomes. It covers 22 output metrics, 18 impact metrics, and 1 input metric. Examples of output metrics include the number of organisations involved in citizen science projects, firms involved in co-creation activities with users, and industry-academia co-patents. Impact is measured by metrics such as the number of citations on standards incorporating R&I or intellectual property disclosures. The input dimension is reflected by the number of researchers involved in standardisation. Additionally, the framework defines 22 economic metrics and 19 societal metrics to equally capture the weight of KV on both economic and societal aspects. Indicators like intellectual property transactions, start-up, and venture capital financing measure the economic dimension, while public engagement, citizen participation, and open-science help to capture the societal dimension. Overall, the system is coherently structured, and all metrics are linked to each other, thus establishing a comprehensive approach. However, challenges exist, mainly in terms of transparency, data sources, and data inconsistencies. Therefore, the report emphasises the need to pursue an iterative approach in the development and implementation of the framework. In this regard, testing out these metrics is a great way to assess if they really measure what is intended to be measured. Nonetheless, this set of measurements serves as a valuable resource for countries to assess their performance in terms of knowledge valorisation and to navigate their R&I ecosystem. Furthermore, promoting knowledge valorisation will enable the R&I sector to strengthen its position as an important pillar for reinforcing Europe’s prosperity and competitiveness.