关于科技评价和科技评价改革的讨论
|
摘要
目前,科技评价已成为我国科技界备受关注的问题,科技评价的改革也被提到落实国家创新驱动发展战略的高度.然而,什么是科技评价?科技评价要遵循哪些基本准则?如何理解评价的独立性?对于这些关于科技评价和科技评价改革的基本问题,目前各方面的认识和理解还存在一定的差异.本文提出,为了推动科技评价的改革取得实质性进展,从落实国家创新驱动发展战略的需求和当前科技界反映最强烈的问题出发,可以将公共R&D(research and development)的绩效评价和学术评价中的价值导向问题作为科技评价改革的突破口.并针对公共R&D绩效评价的三个基本原则(独立性、可信性和有用性)进行了讨论.简要介绍了我国公共R&D绩效评价的成功案例—"国家自然科学基金资助与管理绩效国际评估",重点分析该评估如何体现这三个基本原则.试图针对科技评价和科技评价改革的一些基本的、有争议问题的进行讨论,希望有助于促进科技管理者、科学家和评价专家之间的对话,并为推动我国科技评价的改革提供参考.
Currently, science and technology evaluation(S&T evaluation) has become a major concern in China. However, what is "S&T Evaluation"? What does the term "S&T Evaluation" mean internationally? What are the top priorities for the establishment of S&T evaluation system in China? For the issues above mentioned, the Chinese government officials, scientists and evaluators have not yet come to an agreement. The main idea this article discusses is that, given the significant expansion of public R&D funding in China, the need for understanding performance of the public R&D funding has become increasingly necessary and urgent. As a critical element in China's innovation systems, public R&D performance evaluation seems to react more slowly than other aspects though it should be one of the top priorities for S&T evaluation in China. This article focuses on three interconnected aspects for public R&D performance evaluation: independence, credibility and utility, which are intrinsically linked and support the establishment of national R&D evaluation systems. The author attempts to open a discussion on the current debates about independence of evaluation, including the criteria to assess the independence of evaluation functions, different levels and types of independence for different situations and self-evaluations vs. independent evaluation. The article provides a successful case of public R&D performance evaluation in China, the International Evaluation on the Funding and Management Performance of the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The case is the most influential R&D evaluation up to now, and represents good practice from China. The article focuses on the approaches or solutions that have been used in the case to ensure the independence, credibility and utility of evaluation. The facts and viewpoints presented in this case analysis are based on the author' direct involvement in the real evaluation practice of the case.
Currently, science and technology evaluation(S&T evaluation) has become a major concern in China. However, what is "S&T Evaluation"? What does the term "S&T Evaluation" mean internationally? What are the top priorities for the establishment of S&T evaluation system in China? For the issues above mentioned, the Chinese government officials, scientists and evaluators have not yet come to an agreement. The main idea this article discusses is that, given the significant expansion of public R&D funding in China, the need for understanding performance of the public R&D funding has become increasingly necessary and urgent. As a critical element in China's innovation systems, public R&D performance evaluation seems to react more slowly than other aspects though it should be one of the top priorities for S&T evaluation in China. This article focuses on three interconnected aspects for public R&D performance evaluation: independence, credibility and utility, which are intrinsically linked and support the establishment of national R&D evaluation systems. The author attempts to open a discussion on the current debates about independence of evaluation, including the criteria to assess the independence of evaluation functions, different levels and types of independence for different situations and self-evaluations vs. independent evaluation. The article provides a successful case of public R&D performance evaluation in China, the International Evaluation on the Funding and Management Performance of the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The case is the most influential R&D evaluation up to now, and represents good practice from China. The article focuses on the approaches or solutions that have been used in the case to ensure the independence, credibility and utility of evaluation. The facts and viewpoints presented in this case analysis are based on the author' direct involvement in the real evaluation practice of the case.
引文
1 Dai T,Li X X.Analysis on problems and reform perspectives of China’s S&T evaluation(in Chinese).Policy Manag Res,2013,28:750-755[代涛,李晓轩.我国科技评价的问题分析与改革思路.政策与管理研究,2013,28:750-755]
2 Guo J.Reviewed on public R&D performance evaluation research(in Chinese).Sci Technol Manag Res,2014,1:52-57[郭嘉.公共R&D绩效评价相关研究综述.科技管理研究,2014,1:52-57]
3 María B.Solutions related to challenges of independence,credibility and use of evaluation.In:Proceedings from the Third International Conference on National Evaluation Capacities,2013
4 United Nations Evaluation Group.UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation.New York:UNEG,2016
5 Committee to Review the National Nanotechnology Initiative of National Research Council.Triennial Review of National Nanotechnology Initiative.Washington DC:The National Academies Press,2013
6 Zhen Y H,Chen Z Y.The roles of users in enhancing utility of evaluation.In:Proceedings from the Second International Conference on National Evaluation Capacities,2011,Johannesburg,South Africa.Publication by UNDP Evaluation Office,2012,55-62
2 Guo J.Reviewed on public R&D performance evaluation research(in Chinese).Sci Technol Manag Res,2014,1:52-57[郭嘉.公共R&D绩效评价相关研究综述.科技管理研究,2014,1:52-57]
3 María B.Solutions related to challenges of independence,credibility and use of evaluation.In:Proceedings from the Third International Conference on National Evaluation Capacities,2013
4 United Nations Evaluation Group.UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation.New York:UNEG,2016
5 Committee to Review the National Nanotechnology Initiative of National Research Council.Triennial Review of National Nanotechnology Initiative.Washington DC:The National Academies Press,2013
6 Zhen Y H,Chen Z Y.The roles of users in enhancing utility of evaluation.In:Proceedings from the Second International Conference on National Evaluation Capacities,2011,Johannesburg,South Africa.Publication by UNDP Evaluation Office,2012,55-62