An Analysis of Urban Public Policy Regarding Science, Technology and Innovation from the Perceptions of Stakeholders: A Case Study for a City of an Emerging Country

  • Alexander Cotte Poveda
  • Clara Carolina Jimenez
  • Clara Inés Pardo MartínezEmail author


Rapid advances in science, technology and innovation (STI) have transformed the management of cities, have great potential to improve the requirements of local governments and citizens, and can help generate sustainable urban development and equality, especially in developing countries, to decrease poverty and increase education and health. These topics note the importance of developing STI in urban policies as an integrative element to promote urban development based on the necessities of current and future societies and the importance of knowing the perceptions of different stakeholders in the city with respect to STI. Therefore, this study seeks to determine the STI public policy of a city in an emerging country by using a cross-impact analysis based on workshops and interviews with experts and interest groups. From this study, we want to develop recommendations to formulate new public policy regarding the state of science, technology and innovation in Bogotá. The application of this methodology identified key policy factors, such as STI investment, regional vision, resource optimization, entrepreneurship, promotion of technological development centres and participation in peace scenarios. These factors require in-depth exploration in order to improve the quality of the policy. Finally, based on the results obtained in this study, we developed some thoughts and recommendations about Bogotá’s STI public policy formulation that can be used as key input for policymakers and decision-makers to improve the promotion of STI to achieve sustainable development and the well-being of the population.


Public policy Science Technology Innovation Cross-impact Stakeholders City of an emerging country 


  1. Audretsch, D. (2012). Determinants of High-Growth Entrepreneurship Report Prepared for the OECD/DBA International Workshop on High-Growth Firms: Local Policies and Local Determinants. Copenhagen, 28 March 2012.Google Scholar
  2. Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Importance of Context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonnett, M., & Williams, J. (1998). Environmental Education and Primary Children’s Attitudes Towards Nature and the Environment. Cambridge Journal of Education, 28, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brito, L. (2014). The Role of Science, Technology and Innovation Policies and Instruments for a Paradigm Shift Towards Sustainable Development. Chapter 2 of Book Technologies for Sustainable Development.
  5. Commission on Science and Technology for Development. (2013). Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable. Economic and Social Council, 1–19.Google Scholar
  6. Conpes. (2009). National Policy of Science, Technology and Innovation. Bogotá, D.C.Google Scholar
  7. District Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation. (2007). Science, Technology and innovation Plan Bogotá. 2007–2019. Bogotá.Google Scholar
  8. European Commission. (2015). Quality of Life in European Cities.
  9. Godet, M. (2007a). Tools Box of Strategic Prospective. Paris: LIPS Books.Google Scholar
  10. Godet, M. (2007b). Tools Box of Strategic Prospective. Paris: Cuadernos de LIPS.Google Scholar
  11. Guttieres, D., Fransiska, G. A., & Kusuma Dewi, S. R. (2016). Role of Science, Technology & Innovation in Urban Frameworks: Enhancing the Science-Policy-Practice Interface for Resilient Cities. Brief for GSDR.Google Scholar
  12. Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2017). The Impact of Triple Helix Agents on Entrepreneurial Innovations’ Performance: An Inside Look at Enterprises Located in an Emerging Economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 294–309.Google Scholar
  13. Hammer, S. (2011). Cities and Green Growth: A Conceptual Framework. OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2011/08, OECD Publishing.
  14. McDonald, R., & Bailly, A. (2017). What Investors Want: A Guide for Cities.
  15. McFarlane, C., & Söderström, O. (2017). On Alternative Smart Cities: From a Technology-Intensive to a Knowledge-Intensive Smart Urbanism. City, 21(3–4), 312–328.Google Scholar
  16. Morgan, D., & Krueger, R. (1993). When to Use Focus Groups and Why. In D. Morgan (Ed.), Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art (pp. 3–20). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. National Council of Innovation for Competitiveness. (2012). National Strategy of Innovation. Santiago.Google Scholar
  18. OECD. (2012). National Strategies for Science, Technology and Innovation. STI Policy Profiles: Innovation Policy Governance, 146–148.Google Scholar
  19. Palomba, C. A., & Banta, T. W. (1999). Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Prospective EU. (2017). MIC MAC. Structural Analysis.Google Scholar
  21. Schnelle, W., & Stoltz, I. (1987). The Metaplan Method: Communication Tools for Planning Learning Groups (Metaplan Series No. 7). Goethestrasse, Germany.Google Scholar
  22. Science, Technology and Innovation Ministry. (2015). National Plant of Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) 2015–2021. San Jóse.Google Scholar
  23. Sela. (2016a). Science, Technology and Innovation in Latin America & Caribe Public Policy. Lima: Ecuador Case.Google Scholar
  24. Sela. (2016b). Public Policies on Science, Technology and Innovation in Latin America and Caribe. Lima: Ecuador Case.Google Scholar
  25. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). (2017). UN Moves to Tap Transformative Power of Science, Technology and Innovation to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from
  26. Torgerson. (1986). Between Knowledge and Politics: Three Faces of Policy Analysis. Policy Science, 19, 33–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. UNCTAD. (2011). A Framework for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Reviews. Retrieved from
  28. United Nations. (2016). Smart Cities and Infrastructure. Report of the Secretary-General. Retrieved from Documents/ecn162016d2_en.pdf

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Cotte Poveda
    • 1
    • 2
  • Clara Carolina Jimenez
    • 2
  • Clara Inés Pardo Martínez
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Universidad Santo TomásBogotáColombia
  2. 2.Colombian Observatory of Science and Technology (OCyT)BogotáColombia
  3. 3.School of ManagementUniversidad del RosarioBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations