共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 406 毫秒
1.
任务导向型创新政策:框架理论与实践 《科学学研究》2023,41(1):30-37
任务导向型创新政策是为应对重大社会挑战而兴起的新政策范式，已成为许多国家解决“急、难、险、重”等科学问题的系统性政策干预方案。文章围绕任务导向型创新政策的概念内涵、要素构成、主要特征、理论解释与政策实践等不同维度展开全面分析。研究表明，任务导向型创新政策主要由政策目标、政策主体、政策工具和政策过程等要素构成，并具有方向引导、市场创建、协同参与和动态评估等特征。转型失灵理论为任务导向型创新政策干预创新活动的合法性提供了理论解释。现有任务导向型创新政策实践主要聚焦于保障国防安全、实现产业追赶和应对重大社会挑战三个方面。研究可为中国制定和实施任务导向型创新政策提供理论支撑和经验借鉴。 相似文献
2.
周华东 《科学学与科学技术管理》2011,32(11)
随着科技的发展,其社会、经济、政治影响力得到全面扩展和深化,科技政策研究也因此变得越来越丰富而复杂,与此同时,科技政策研究的内涵和外延也变得更加难以界定,传统的科技政策的划分方法已经难以涵盖和解释当前丰富而庞杂的科技政策研究体系。因此,将利用政策分析中＂政策场域（Policy Arena）＂这一重要概念,对经济商业场域（Economy and Business Arena）、公共行政场域（Public Administration Arena）、公民社会场域（Civil SocietyArena）和道德伦理场域（Morality and Ethics Arena）中的科技政策,从政策主体（Policy Actors）、互动模式（Interaction Models）以及政策目标（Orientation of Policy）三个维度重新进行边界划分和内涵界定。科技政策研究实际上存在广义和狭义之分。广义的科技政策研究包涵所有与科技相关的政策研究,而狭义的科技政策研究为基于＂科学—技术—创新＂范式展开的科学技术与创新政策研究（STIPS）,这也是我们最常见的科技政策研究的界定。从历史发展的角度,对狭义的科技政策研究进行了进一步的梳理和分析。 相似文献
3.
4.
摘要：将科技创新政策归纳为六种类型,建立三阶段通径模型,以上海市为案例进行实证分析,研究了科技创新政策对企业不同创新阶段能力及企业创新的影响。研究结果表明,六类创新政策对于企业创新产业化实现的路径影响存在异质性,财政政策、外部规范性政策只对创新基础投入能力产生直接正向影响,金融政策对创新基础投入能力及创新中间转化能力产生直接正向影响;知识产权政策对创新基础投入能力及创新产业化实现能力产生直接正向影响;税收政策、人才政策对创新成果产业化三个阶段均产生直接正向影响。且六类创新政策对于促进企业创新成果产业化的政策效应大小依次是创新投入能力、创新中间转化能力、创新产业化实现能力。 相似文献
5.
对科技政策实施结果及其影响进行分析和评估对政府完善科技政策意义重大。本文以国家层面发布的与产业技术创新相关性最强的454条技术创新政策为研究对象,基于柯布-道格拉斯生产函数,利用2000-2009年产业面板数据,对政策力度、政策稳定性与创新绩效进行了研究。结果表明:创新政策力度对技术绩效有显著促进作用,对经济绩效不显著;政策的不稳定性会抑制政策对技术绩效的激励;政策对绩效作用存在滞后效应。比较不同政策工具对创新绩效的影响,发现供给政策对创新的技术绩效有激励作用,环境政策对技术绩效和经济绩效有激励作用,需求政策对经济绩效作用显著。最后,提出应加大需求政策供给力度,完善创新政策体系等相关建议。 相似文献
6.
当前关于创新生态系统（创新30）的思辨研究取得了一定的成就,迫切需要实证研究对思辨中提出的理念进一步深入探索和实际检验。建立适用于创新生态系统的评估指标体系,是引导创新生态系统建设、优化第三代创新政策的有效举措。本文从创新政策出发,研究创新生态系统评估的思路、方法和指标等问题,建构了包含创新生态系统动态演化、可持续创新、开放性三个维度的创新生态系统评估指标体系。选择2007-2016年我国高新技术产业的相关数据进行实证评估。研究发现：第一,我国高新技术产业创新生态系统增长空间较大,同时也佐证了当前的创新政策亟需转型。第二,近年来我国创新政策在促进高新技术产业种群结构方面取得了较好的效果,但目前种群之间协同创新仍动力不足。第三,在推动科技成果转化方面取得了一定成效,但在改善创新投入与产出比例上尚需调整政策,未来应追求更加广泛的系统开放性。第四,创新政策应注重促进创新生态系统动态演化、可持续创新和开放性等各方面的协同发展,避免因过度引导而产生的创新生态系统的畸形发展问题。 相似文献
7.
当前科技政策学尚未形成广为认可的理论体系和研究框架。通过梳理既往国内外科技政策研究与政策实践的主体内容,总结分析科技政策相关概念与内涵的演变,从科学学、创新经济学和公共政策学3个学科视角对科技政策学的主体理论进行分类梳理,在我国科技治理体系与治理能力现代化的总体需求与框架下探索提出科技政策研究的三层级框架,包括宏观层的科技战略研究、中观层的创新系统和政策工具研究以及微观层的政策过程研究,以期为科技政策研究的学科化发展提供支撑。 相似文献
8.
创新科技政策及其三阶段周期研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
创新科技政策(ITP)是政府为了影响或者控制企业技术创新资源和知识利用及转化的速度、效率、规模,而采用的一系列政策的总和,强调政策决策者应关注创新技术的动态演化和变革。通过对创新政策、产业政策和ITP的比较,探讨了ITP的特点和意义,进一步对创新科技政策三阶段周期进行归纳,总结了各阶段政策目标和支持措施。结合以色列ITP实施案例得出启示,ITP为区域创新政策刺激企业创新提供了新的研究视角。 相似文献
9.
随着中国的崛起,其创新政策越来越受到国际力量的关注,并不可避免地受到国际力量的干预和影响。因此,从国际视野审视创新政策及过程对中国科学地制定创新政策具有重要意义。已有研究主要关注全球化影响下创新政策目标、内容和工具的变化,并把创新政策看作一个主权国家的内部政治活动,从政策过程讨论全球化和国际因素对创新政策的影响还不多见。本文从国际视野出发构建了基于“过程—主体—影响力”的创新政策过程三维分析框架,并对“中国自主创新产品政府采购”政策和“中国制造2025”政策的政策过程进行了比较分析。研究认为,中国的创新政策与贸易乃至对外事务的界限模糊化使得创新政策过程成为国际—国内双重博弈的复杂过程,创新政策制定的各个阶段都受到国际因素的影响,各类利益相关者基于形势变化和利益需求在不同政策中发挥的作用有明显区别,政策出台国和政策干预国的相互依赖程度和国际影响力最终决定了一国创新政策的受干预程度。 相似文献
10.
赶超型创新政策是任务导向型创新政策的一种类型,为提升企业技术能力提供了新型政策方案,但现有研究对赶超型创新政策如何影响企业技术能力仍未给出充分的理论解释。本文基于产业创新系统理论,构建赶超型创新政策影响路径的分析框架,并进行了实证检验。研究发现：(1)赶超型创新政策通过促进多链融合,发挥“织链结网”的作用,推动企业技术能力提升;(2)服务链关联机构创新参与是赶超型创新政策影响力传导的核心节点,也是连接政府与市场的中间桥梁;(3)创新链关联机构创新参与和产业链关联企业创新参与是赶超型创新政策影响的有效路径,二者协同耦合能够显著提升企业研发投入行为;(4)创新期望与研发投入是企业技术能力提升的决定性因素,也是赶超型创新政策的影响力发挥作用的微观基础。本研究深化了创新政策影响路径研究,对于提升我国企业技术能力具有一定实践意义。 相似文献
11.
当前科技创新政策呈体系化发展,已逐渐成为独立的政策部类。研究提出科技创新政策体系框架并推动形成共识,是支撑政策研究和政策实践的理论基础,也是推动政策制定、交流、评价和实施的保障。本文基于理论分析和对比研究,在公共政策范畴中,围绕研发系统和技术经济系统厘清科技创新政策体系的范畴及与其他经济社会政策的关联;并探讨从政策分析、政策制定、政策执行、政策目标四视角提出了科技创新政策体系框架结构,（1）从政策分析视角,按照政策类型分为强制性政策、宏观战略和落地实施政策;（2）从政策制定视角,按照政策工具类型分为供给面、需求面和环境面政策;（3）从政策执行视角,按照创新主体类型分为政府、企业、公共研发机构等类型政策;（4）从政策目标视角,按照价值导向分为经济目标和社会目标导向政策。 相似文献
12.
This opening article in the special issue provides a reflexive overview of the nature and purpose of science, technology and innovation (STI) policy research at present, and makes a case for a collective and critical reflection on the means and ends of our research. The complex interaction between the past, present and future in the STI policy research field is one of the key themes of this article and of the special issue more generally. We first attempt to problematise what current STI policy research is, and then expand on the goals of the special issue. Besides summarising each article, we also discuss how these articles, individually and collectively, provide an overview of a number of epistemic, normative and practical challenges that confront us, articulating the main features of each of these. We end with a call for a sustained, critical and extensive ‘conversation’ among researchers in our field about the nature and purpose of STI policy research and the challenges we face. 相似文献
13.
Luc Soete 《Research Policy》2019,48(4):849-857
The setting up of the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) at Sussex University 50 years ago represented a “transformative change” in the research on science policy and the understanding of the nature and origin of technological change and innovation studies. It influenced policymakers across the world in both the mature Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and the developing world. It made the topic of science, technology and innovation (STI) familiar to business studies scholars. Today though, the analysis of STI appears to be somewhat in crisis. On the one hand, there is growing evidence that the growth and welfare gains of new technologies and innovation are no longer forthcoming in an automatic “trickle-down” fashion. The knowledge and technology diffusion “machine” appears broken. On the other hand, there are growing environmental concerns about the negative externalities of unsustainable fossil-fuel-based growth as industrialization spreads across the globe. STI policy appears somehow stuck in an industrial efficiency and consumerism mode that is unable to address in a satisfactory way the impact of such negative externalities. Can the broader historical approach as popularized within the so-called Science and Technology Studies (STS) tradition provide additional, complementary insights? Yes, if STI and STS scholars are prepared to leave their respective conceptual comfort zones and address in complementary fashion some of the major societal policy challenges confronting science, technology and innovation policy today. 相似文献
14.
我国科技政策学研究态势及国际比较 《科学学研究》2017,35(9):1289-1300
本文采用科学计量学方法,以科技论文和资助项目为主要资料,对2011年以来国际上发表的科技政策研究论文、以及美国SciSIP计划、日本SciREX计划和中国国家自然科学基金委员会管理科学部“科技管理与政策”相关的规划布局和资助项目进行定量和定性综合分析,揭示国际和我国科技政策学的研究态势。美国科技政策“学”强调“科学基础”,主要侧重于服务政府部门的科技政策制定和政策过程的科学化;日本则倾向“学科建设”,包括国家重要政策议题的专题研究（任务导向研究）,针对科技政策学术共同体的课题资助（自由申请研究）,机构设置与人才培养,以及数据基础设施建设。发展我国的科技政策学,建议同时借鉴日本学科建设的思路以及美国协调各政府部门政策过程的思路;建议加强社会科学与自然科学的跨学科融合研究,考虑设置“科技政策研究”专项资助渠道与多元资助机制;建议将数据基础设施建设作为一项基础性、战略性任务;建议建立政策研究界和决策者之间的建制性交流研讨机制等。 相似文献
15.
Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
Departing from a number of theoretical perspectives from which rationales for science, technology and innovation (STI) policy can be extracted, this paper discusses three questions. First, what rationales for public intervention can be derived from different economic theories, including theories usually associated with spatial dynamics and territorial relationships? Second, what policy instruments or policy-mixes can be associated with the various rationales? Third, what do these theories and associated rationales tell us about the territorial level or levels at which STI policies can usefully be designed and implemented? 相似文献
16.
In the last decade, there has been an increasing recognition among Central American policy makers of the central importance of science, technology and innovation (STI) for inclusive and sustainable economic growth, based on higher productivity. This paper aims to study current STI policies in those countries and explore whether this increasing acknowledgement has come along with new and more active policies. Empirical evidence collected through questionnaire-based interviews with high-level government officials in each country shows that Central American governments have built public organisations and institutions to support STI, such as laws, national plans and a wide variety of policy instruments. Yet available science and technology indicators illustrate that the results are still meagre. This paper identifies eight barriers faced by these governments when designing and implementing STI policies. 相似文献
17.
Three frames for innovation policy: R&D,systems of innovation and transformative change 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is shaped by persistent framings that arise from historical context. Two established frames are identified as co-existing and dominant in contemporary innovation policy discussions. The first frame is identified as beginning with a Post-World War II institutionalisation of government support for science and R&D with the presumption that this would contribute to growth and address market failure in private provision of new knowledge. The second frame emerged in the 1980s globalising world and its emphasis on competitiveness which is shaped by the national systems of innovation for knowledge creation and commercialisation. STI policy focuses on building links, clusters and networks, and on stimulating learning between elements in the systems, and enabling entrepreneurship. A third frame linked to contemporary social and environmental challenges such as the Sustainable Development Goals and calling for transformative change is identified and distinguished from the two earlier frames. Transformation refers to socio-technical system change as conceptualised in the sustainability transitions literature. The nature of this third framing is examined with the aim of identifying its key features and its potential for provoking a re-examination of the earlier two frames. One key feature is its focus on experimentation, and the argument that the Global South does not need to play catch-up to follow the transformation model of the Global North. It is argued that all three frames are relevant for policymaking, but exploring options for transformative innovation policy should be a priority. 相似文献
18.
19.
20.
Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is borne by a set of historically contingent concepts, models, and metaphors. From around 1950 to 1980, its language was dominated by the contract metaphor and the linear model of innovation, both of which have catered for beliefs in stability, orderliness, and distinct social roles for scientists and policymakers. While prominent new models of the 1990s (mode 2, post-normal science, triple helix) had challenged the old contract metaphor, they remained experts’ brainchildren. After 2000, in contrast, we observe the emergence and pluralization of several new and powerful concepts. Building on conceptual history and cognitive linguistics, we analyze three of these new concepts: “frontier research,” “grand challenges,” and “responsible research and innovation” (RRI). Whereas the “frontier” and “grand challenges” convey many layered historical meanings, a distinct metaphorical appeal, and have become popularized beyond expert’s communities, the RRI discourse, though the most ambitious one, has not yet shaken off its roots in the bureaucratic structures of the European Commission. Finally, we discuss which conceptual and metaphorical properties enable the career of STI policy discourses in the 21st century. 相似文献