Was wirkt hat recht: Zur Konjunktur und Kritik des Wirkungsbegriffs und Schlussfolgerungen für die Technikfolgenabschätzung

Franziska Sörgel

doi:10.14512/tatup.7253

Authors

Franziska Sörgel Institut für Technikfolgenabschätzung und Systemanalyse, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Karlsruhe (DE) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2490-1500 franziska.soergel@kit.edu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.7253

Keywords:

impact, evaluation, reflexive impact assessment, heuristics, technology assessment

Abstract

This research article develops a reflexive conception of ‘impact’ in technology assessment (TA). Impact is conceived as a relational and processual attribution that is co-produced by indicators and evaluation practices. Building on philosophical debates on causality (Aristotle, Hume, Kant), science and technology studies, evaluation research, and TA, four analytical dimensions are proposed: causal architecture, uncertainty profile, framing order, and epistemic plurality. Using these criteria, the analysis of central impact regimes reveals how control logics standardize impact and obscure long-term effects. This upstream framework for reflection redefines impact as a formative and negotiable process, enabling TA to understand epistemic prerequisites and design evaluative orders that better live up to the complexity of reflexive knowledge production.

References

Aristoteles (1986): Physik. Vorlesung über Natur. Bücher I‑IV. Hamburg: Meiner.

Beckert, Jens (2016): Imagined futures. Fictional expectations and capitalist dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674545878

Belcher, Brian; Davel, Rachel; Claus, Rachel (2020): A refined method for theory-based evaluation of the societal impacts of research. In: MethodsX 7, S. 100788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2020.100788

Boltanski, Luc; Thévenot, Laurent (2006): On justification. Economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400827145

Bornmann, Lutz (2013): What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (2), S. 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22803

Bozeman, Barry; Sarewitz, Daniel (2011): Public value mapping and science policy evaluation. In: Minerva 49 (1), S. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7

Brewer, John (2011): The impact of impact. In: Research Evaluation 20 (3), S. 255–256. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876869

Bührer, Susanne; Feidenheimer, Alexander; Walz, Rainer; Lindner, Ralf; Beckert, Bernd; Wallwaey, Elisa (2022): Concepts and methods to measure societal impacts – an overview. Discussion Papers Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis No. 74. Karlsruhe: Frauenhofer ISI. Online verfügbar unter https://publica-rest.fraunhofer.de/server/api/core/bitstreams/06cee3b3-f386-4ef5-8026-26c9311e0923/content, zuletzt geprüft am 13.01.2026.

Buxton, Martin; Hanney, Steve (1996): How can payback from health services research be assessed? In: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 1 (1), S. 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/135581969600100107

Dahler-Larsen, Peter (2014): Constitutive effects of performance indicators. Getting beyond unintended consequences. In: Public Management Review 16 (7), S. 969–986. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.770058

Daston, Lorraine (1995): The moral economy of science. In: Osiris 10, S. 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1086/368740

Decker, Michael; Ladikas, Miltos; Stephan, Susanne; Wütscher, Friederike (Hg.) (2004): Bridges between science, society and policy. Technology assessment – methods and impacts. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06171-8

de Jong, Stefan; Spaapen, Jack (2023): Formative evaluation in the Netherlands. An opportunity for the arts, humanities and social sciences. In: Michael Ochsner und Zoe Bulaitis (Hg.): Accountability in academic life. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, S. 172–185. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800885738.00021

EPC – European Parliament and Council (2021): Regulation (EU) 2021/695. Online verfügbar unter http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/695/oj, zuletzt geprüft am 26.01.2026.

Espeland, Wendy; Sauder, Michael (2007): Rankings and reactivity. How public measures recreate social worlds. In: American Journal of Sociology 113 (1), S. 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1086/517897

Felt, Ulrike (2017): Under the shadow of time. Where indicators and academic values meet. In: Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 3, S. 53–63. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2017.109

Gläser, Jochen; Laudel, Grit (2007): The social construction of bibliometric evaluations. In: Richard Whitley und Jochen Gläser (Hg.): The changing governance of the sciences. Dordrecht: Springer, S. 101–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6746-4_5

Godin, Benoît (2002): Outline for a history of science measurement. In: Science, Technology, & Human Values 27 (1), S. 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390202700101

Godin, Benoît (2006): The knowledge-based economy. Conceptual framework or buzzword?. In: Journal of Technology Transfer 31 (1), S. 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-005-5010-x

Grunwald, Armin (2006): Technikfolgenabschätzung als Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung. Konzeptionelle Herausforderungen und methodische Probleme. In: Jürgen Kopfmüller (Hg.): Ein Konzept auf dem Prüfstand. Das integrative Nachhaltigkeitskonzept in der Forschungspraxis Berlin: edition sigma, S. 39–61. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845267685-39

Helgesson, Claes-Fredrik; Muniesa, Fabian (2013): For what it’s worth. An introduction to valuation studies. In: Valuation Studies 1 (1), S. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3384/vs.2001-5992.13111

Hume, David (2007). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jasanoff, Sheila (2003): Technologies of humility. Citizen participation in governing science. In: Minerva 41 (3), S. 223–244. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025557512320

Kant, Immanuel (1998): Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Hamburg: Meiner.

Krempkow, René (2018): Exzellenz in der Gründungsförderung erfassen – ein vermessen(d)es Anliegen an Hochschulen? In: Das Hochschulwesen 66 (5/6), S. 140–147. Online verfügbar unter https://www.hochschulwesen.info/inhalte/hsw-5-6-2018.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 30.01.2026.

Lamont, Michèle (2009): How professors think. Inside the curious world of academic judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674054158

Morton, Sarah (2015): Progressing research impact assessment. A ‘contributions’ approach. In: Research Evaluation 24 (4), S. 405–419. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv016

Pasanen, Tiina ; Shaxson, Louise (2016): How to design a monitoring and evaluation framework for a policy research project. London: Overseas Development Institute. Online verfügbar unter https://media.odi.org/documents/10259.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 26.01.2026.

Paschen, Herbert; Gresser, Klaus; Conrad, Felix (1978): Technology Assessment – Technologiefolgenabschätzung. Ziele, methodische und organisatorische Probleme, Anwendungen. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus Verlag.

REF – Research Excellence Framework (2021): Index of revisions to the ‘Guidance on submissions’. Online verfügbar unter https://2021.ref.ac.uk/media/1447/ref-2019_01-guidance-on-submissions.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 13.01.2026.

Spaapen, Jack; van Drooge, Leonie (2011): Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment. In: Research Evaluation 20 (3), S. 211–218. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876742

Strathern, Marilyn (2000): The tyranny of transparency. In: British Educational Research Journal 26 (3), S. 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/713651562

Svare, Helge; Dahl Gjefsen, Mads; den Boer, Alanya; Kok, Kristiaan (2023): Learning systems and learning paths in sustainability transitions. In: Ecology and Society 28 (1), S. art22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13868-280122

van Mierlo, Barbara et al. (2010): Reflexive monitoring in action. A guide for monitoring system innovation projects. Amsterdam: Athena Institute, VU. Online verfügbar unter https://edepot.wur.nl/149471, zuletzt geprüft am 26.01.2026.