Conclusion and Critique

This chapter attempted to provide more information as to how innovation is currently measured and conceived, particularly on the national level.

There are already a set of well established indicators and measurements that are harmonized by means of transnational organizations such as the OECD. More recently, however, the monitoring of research and innovation has also been criticized for not sufficiently covering new trends in knowledge production.

This chapter attempted to provide the perspective of Open Science and Open Innovation on this aspect of the science system. It is argued that the digital transformation and the emergence of novel services may allow for measuring and more systematically monitoring processes of knowledge production, rather than focusing solely on outputs or inputs of knowledge production.

Process generated data may provide a gateway towards understanding dynamics and trends as well as the participation in research. Yet, these data sources should also treated with caution. Process generated data are provided by commercial actors that attempt to maximise platform based activities. Social media platforms, for instance, are business actors whose interests should also be taken into account if platform generated data are interpreted. Interaction, usage and coverage of these digital platforms are at best only partially understood.

Different to established indicators there is currently only little knowledge about the inconsistencies of data provision which make it necesssary to further explore processes of digital knowledge production and innovation. Yet the data sources and platforms described also show the potential of using digital, openly provided data sources for monitoring innovation and development in the digital age.