The societal costs of research misconduct: Some method considerations from the DEFORM Project

被引:0
作者
Combe C.G. [1 ]
Faucheux S. [1 ]
Kuszla C. [2 ]
机构
[1] IFG Executive Education, INSEEC U, 43 Quai de Grenelle, Paris
[2] Université Paris Nanterre, 200 Avenue de la République, Nanterre
来源
Faucheux, Sylvie (sfaucheux@inseec.com) | 1600年 / Inderscience Publishers卷 / 23期
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Deform; Dieselgate; Integrity; KQA; Occupational fraud; Research misconduct; Social costs;
D O I
10.1504/IJSD.2020.115210
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
While research misconduct (RM) and non-responsible innovation (NRI) engage distinct considerations of integrity and responsibility, we can link them with a broad vision of values for science in society. We present a novel econometric approach, developed in the European DEFORM Project, for estimation of the incidence and direct social costs of research misconduct by analysing RM as occupational fraud. This is applied to publicly funded research in Europe, to obtain empirical estimates of the order of magnitude of financial losses to research investors due to projects tainted by RM. Turning to the societal context, notably the incitation to fraud afforded by commercial and institutional performance pressures, we discuss the example of direct and indirect social costs of RM in the 'Dieselgate' scandal. We thus situate social costs of RM as one facet of quality assurance and governance of research activity and of the uses of science in society. © 2020 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:175 / 204
页数:29
相关论文
共 69 条
  • [1] Amelang S., BMW, Daimler, and VW vow to fight in green transport revolution, CLEW (Clean Energy Wire - Journalism for the Energy Transition), (2016)
  • [2] Amelang S., Wehrmann B., Dieselgate' - a timeline of the car emissions fraud scandal in Germany, CLEW (Clean Energy Wire - Journalism for the Energy Transition), (2020)
  • [3] Barre R., Des concepts à la pratique de l'innovation responsable: à propos d'un séminaire franco-britannique, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 19, 4, pp. 405-409, (2011)
  • [4] Baskaran A., Book review: UNESCO Science Report: Towards 2030, Institutions and Economies, 8, 2, pp. 125-127, (2017)
  • [5] Betz F., Managing Science, Methodology and Organization of Research, (2011)
  • [6] Bouquin H., Kuszla C., Le contrôle de gestion, (2014)
  • [7] Bouter L.M., Tijdink J., Axelsen N., Martinson B.C., Ter Riet G., Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four world conferences on research integrity, Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1, 1, (2016)
  • [8] Carafoli E., Scientific misconduct: the dark side of science, Rendiconti Lincei, 26, 3, pp. 369-382, (2015)
  • [9] Chevassus-au-Louis N., Malscience: De la fraude dans les labos, (2016)
  • [10] Chubin D.E., Misconduct in research: an issue of science policy and practice, Minerva, 23, 2, pp. 175-202, (1985)