At first glance Sweden looks like a researcher’s paradise with high levels of GDP investment in research and high scores on citation indexes, yet recent studies have suggested that Sweden might be losing its edge in groundbreaking research. This paper explores why that is happening by examining researchers’ logics of decision-making at a large university in Sweden. Interviews with researchers at different career stages and at a range of different departments are analyzed using a neo-institutionalist framework. The inherent logic of the quasi-markets which have been constructed to implement new policy ideas is compared to the logics by which researchers approach their funding applications and research outputs. The results suggest that a highly fragmented and competitive system can undermine efforts to foster groundbreaking research, despite the expectations posited by a neoliberal logic of governance.
[1]
Implementing the triple helix: the academic response to changing university-industry-government relations in Sweden
,
2005
.
[2]
P. Hall,et al.
Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms
,
1996
.
[3]
R. Merton.
The Matthew Effect in Science
,
1968,
Science.
[4]
R. Goodin,et al.
The Oxford handbook of public policy
,
2008
.
[5]
B. Peters.
Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism
,
1999
.
[6]
Mark A. Pollack.
The New Institutionalisms and European Integration
,
2007
.
[7]
J. Mauch,et al.
Reform and Change in Higher Education
,
2018
.
[8]
Johan P. Olsen,et al.
The Logic of Appropriateness
,
2008
.