美国科技政策学研究计划进展分析与启示

doi:10.6049/kjjbydc.2016110452

科技进步与对策

2017, Vol. 34

Issue (8): 119-124 DOI: 10.6049/kjjbydc.2016110452

科技法制与政策

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

美国科技政策学研究计划进展分析与启示

李宁^1,2,杨耀武^1,2

1.上海科学技术政策研究所；2.上海科技管理干部学院，上海 201800

Analysis on the Development of the Science of Science and Innovation Policy Program in U.S. and Its Inspiration

Li Ning^1,2,Yang Yaowu^1,2

1.Shanghai Institute of Science and Technology Policy, Shanghai 201800,China;2.Shanghai Institute of Science and Technology Management, Shanghai 201800,China

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (4)

全文: PDF (1091 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要美国国家科学基金会于2006年设立了科技政策学研究计划（SciSIP），经过十多年发展，在数据与方法研究以及共同体建设方面取得了重要进展。聚焦于SciSIP计划及其历年项目成果，对SciSIP计划发展历程进行总结，对SciSIP计划的研究成果和面临的挑战进行分析，以期为中国推进科技政策学研究及“科技政策学”这一新兴学科建设提供建议。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	李宁
	杨耀武

关键词 ：科技政策学, 美国科技政策学研究计划, 科学证据, 交叉学科, 科技政策共同体

收稿日期: 2017-01-17

ZTFLH:

G327.12

基金资助:上海市科技发展基金软科学研究项目（14692101200）

通讯作者: 李宁

作者简介: 李宁(1986-)，女，山西太原人，博士，上海科技管理干部学院助理研究员，研究方向为创新管理。

引用本文:

李宁,杨耀武. 美国科技政策学研究计划进展分析与启示[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2017, 34(8): 119-124.
Li Ning,Yang Yaowu. Analysis on the Development of the Science of Science and Innovation Policy Program in U.S. and Its Inspiration. SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS AND POLICY, 2017, 34(8): 119-124.

链接本文:

http://www.kjjb.org/CN/10.6049/kjjbydc.2016110452 或 http://www.kjjb.org/CN/Y2017/V34/I8/119

［1］樊春良，马小亮. 美国科技政策科学的发展及其对中国的启示［J］. 中国软科学，2013（10）: 168-181.
［2］刘立. 发展科技政策学——推进科技体制改革的科学化和民主化［J］. 科学与管理，2012（5）: 4-11.
［3］SCHUNN C D, PB PAULUS, J CAGAN, et al. Final report from the NSF innovation and discovery workshop: the scientific basis of individual and team innovation and discovery［EB/OL］. http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/bcs_sosp_wkshp_rpt.pdf, 2006.
［4］COZZENS S, P REGAN, B RUBIN. Final report: NSF workshop on social organization of science and science policy［EB/OL］. http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/ses_sosp_wksp_rpt.pdf, 2007.
［5］NSF, DIVISION OF SCIENCE RESOURCE STATISTICS. Advancing measures of innovation: knowledge flows, business metrics, and management strategies［EB/OL］．http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/srs_innov_metrics_wkshp.pdf, 2006.
［6］SOCIAL，BEHAVIORAL, ECONOMIC SCIENCES. Science of science and innovation policy: a prospectus［EB/OL］．http: / /www. nsf. gov /sbe /scisip /scisip_prospec. pdf, 2006.
［7］NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. Science of science and innovation policy: principal investigators′ conference summary, steering committee on the science of science and innovation policy principal investigators′ conference［C］/K HUSBANDS FEALING,A S BEATTY,C F CITRO RAPPORTEURS. Committee on national statistics, division of behavioral and social sciences and education［M］.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2014.
［8］FUCHS E. On the relationship between manufacturing and innovation: why not all technologies are created equal［D］. Carnegie Mellon Working Paper, 2013.
［9］OWEN-SMITH J, C SCOTT, J MCCORMICK. Expand and regularize funding for human embryonic stem cell research ［J］. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 2012, 31(1):714-729.
［10］DOU W, X WANG, D SKAU, W RIBARSKY. Leadline: interactive visual analysis of text data through event identification and exploration ［J］. Proceedings of IEEE VAST, 2012, 93-102.
［11］FELDMAN M, A GRADDY-REED. Accelerating commercialization: a new model of strategic foundation funding ［J］. Journal of Technology Transfer, 2013. DOI 10.1007/s10961-013-9311.
［12］FELDMAN M, A GRADDY-REED. Local champions. In Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs ��窞 Transition to Philanthropy ［M］. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing，2014.
［13］HAEUSSLER C, L JIANG, J THURSBY, et al. Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers ［J］. Research Policy, 2013, 43(3):465-475.
［14］TAYLOR M Z , S WILSON. Does culture still matter? the effects of individualism on national innovation rates ［J］. Journal of Business Venturing, 2012, 27:234-247.
［15］STUEN E. Aggregate evidence of localized academic knowledge transfer in the U.S. ［J］. Economics Bulletin, 2013, 33:1468-1478.
［16］STUEN E, A MOBARAK, K MASKUS. Skilled immigration and innovation: evidence from enrolment fluctuations in US doctoral programmes ［J］. The Economic Journal, 2012, 122:1143-1176.
［17］YOUTIE J, J ROGERS, T HEINZE,et al. Career-based influences on scientific recognition in the United States and Europe: longitudinal evidence from curriculum vitae data ［J］. Research Policy, 2013, 42:1341-1355.
［18］AGARWAL R, A OHYAMA. Industry or academia, basic or applied? Career choices and earnings trajectories of scientists ［J］. Management Science, 2013, 59(4):950-970.
［19］OH S, Z LEI, W-C LEE, J YEN. Patent evaluation based on technological trajectory revealed in relevant prior patents［C］/The 18th pacific-asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (PAKDD 2014), Tainan, Taiwan, 2014.
［20］OH S, Z LEI, W-C LEE P MITRA, J YEN. CV-PCR: a context-guided value-driven framework for patent citation recommendation［R］. The ACM international conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM 2013), San Francisco, CA, 2013, October.
［21］PIENTA A, G ALTER, J LYLE. The enduring value of social science research: the use and reuse of primary research data［A］. iPRES2011 Proceedings, 2011.
［22］TEICH A H,I Q FELLER.Toward a community of practice: report on the AAAS-NSF SciSIP grantees workshop［R］,2009.
［23］TEICH A H,I Q FELLER.Building a community of practice II:report on the second AAAS-NSF SciSIP workshop［R］,2010.
［24］JULIA LANE. Big data, science metrics, and science policy, science of science and innovation policy［C］. Principal Investigators’ Conference, 2012.