نسخه متنی مقاله

پيشنهاد چارچوبی مفهومی برای تدوين نقشه جامع علمی کشور ( برنامه ملی توسعه علم، فناوری و نوآوری)

اطلاعات مقاله:
نویسندگان:
  • بهزاد سلطانی

  • مهدی کيامهر

اطلاعات تماس:
  • بهزاد سلطانی

    Affiliation:
    آدرس محل کار:
    تلفن محل کار:
    فکس:
    پست الکترونیک:
  • مهدی کيامهر

    Affiliation:
    آدرس محل کار:
    تلفن محل کار:
    فکس:
    پست الکترونیک:
متن:

در منابع نظري و عملي سياست‌گذاري علم، فناوري و نوآوري مجموعه‌اي از نظريه‌ها، چارچوب‌ها و ابزارها براي تدوين سياست‌هاي ملي علم‌، فناوري و نوآوري هستند که از جنس يک برنامة تحول در سطح کلان‌اند. با‌ اين همه، مرور اين منابع نشان مي‌دهد که نمي‌توان چارچوبي مفهومي براي يکپارچه‌ کردن اين مجموعه از ابزارها يافت. اين مقاله با بررسي مسئلة برنامة ملي توسعة علم، فناوري و نوآوري، به عنوان يک برنامة تحول در سطح کلان و با روش پژوهش بين‌رشته‌اي، مي‌کوشد تا چارچوبي مفهومي از ترکيب اين مجموعه نظريه‌ها و روش‌ها پيشنهاد کند. اين چارچوب مفهومي بر پاية مراحل تدوين يک برنامة تحول و جايابي نظريه‌ها، چارچوب‌ها و ابزارهاي موجود اين حوزه در قالب مراحل ياد‌شده شکل گرفته و از نظريات برخي از خبرگان سياست‌گذاري علم و فناوري کشور استفاده شده است. سپس بر اساس اين چارچوب، روشي براي تدوين نقشة جامع علمي کشور ايران به‌مثابة مصداقي از برنامه‌هاي ملي توسعة علم، فناوري و نوآوري تدوين شده است. در نهايت، موضوعاتي براي پژوهش‌هاي آينده در زمينة سياست‌گذاري علم، فناوري و نوآوري پيشنهاد شده‌اند.

A conceptual Framework for Formulating a National Strategy of Science Technology and Innovation AWT-SEP پيشنهاد چارچوبی مفهومی برای تدوين نقشه جامع علمی کشور ( برنامه ملی توسعه علم، فناوری و نوآوری) AWT-SEP The theoretical and empirical literature in the filed of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Studies (STIP) contains a variety of discrete concepts, frameworks and techniques for policy making. However, an integrative framework is lacking that can guide practitioners as to how to use the research findings in a real context. This paper tries to fill the gap through probing the practical problem of formulating a national science, technology and innovation strategy using an inter-disciplinary (integrative) research method. The proposed conceptual framework is based on positioning the existing concepts, frameworks and techniques in a change management program. Application of this integrative framework is investigated for developing such a national strategy in Iran and future research opportunities in science, technology and innovation policy are suggested. AWT-SEP AWT-SEP بهزاد سلطانی مهدی کيامهر AWT-SEP $A conceptual Framework for Formulating a National Strategy of Science Technology and Innovation AWT-SEP پيشنهاد چارچوبی مفهومی برای تدوين نقشه جامع علمی کشور ( برنامه ملی توسعه علم، فناوری و نوآوری) AWT-SEP The theoretical and empirical literature in the filed of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Studies (STIP) contains a variety of discrete concepts, frameworks and techniques for policy making. However, an integrative framework is lacking that can guide practitioners as to how to use the research findings in a real context. This paper tries to fill the gap through probing the practical problem of formulating a national science, technology and innovation strategy using an inter-disciplinary (integrative) research method. The proposed conceptual framework is based on positioning the existing concepts, frameworks and techniques in a change management program. Application of this integrative framework is investigated for developing such a national strategy in Iran and future research opportunities in science, technology and innovation policy are suggested. AWT-SEP AWT-SEP بهزاد سلطانی مهدی کيامهر AWT-SEP AWT-SEP پيشنهاد چارچوبی مفهومی برای تدوين نقشه جامع علمی کشور ( برنامه ملی توسعه علم، فناوری و نوآوری) AWT-SEP AWT-SEP AWT-SEP AWT-SEP AWT-SEP

رفرانس :

            Fagerberg, J., Innovation: A Guide to the Literature, in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, and R. Nelson, Editors. 2005, Oxford University Press: New York. p. 1-27.

2.          Soltani, B., et al., پانزده مجلد خروجي‌هاي پروژة تهيه درخواست پيشنهادهاي پروژه‌هاي مورد نياز براي طرح تهية نقشه جامع علمي کشور. 1386, Iran National Research Institute for Science Policy: Tehran.

.3          Newell, W., A Theory of Interdisciplinary Studies. Issues in Integrative Studies, 2001. 19: p. 1-25.

.4          Szostak, R., How to Do Interdisciplinarity: Integrating the Debate. Issues in Integrative Studies, 2002. 20: p. 103-122.

.5          Ragsdell, G., Engineering a paradigm shift? An holistic approach to organisational change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 2000. 13(2).

.6          Archibugi, D., Pavitt'S Taxonomy Sixteen Years On: A Review Article. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2001. 10(5): p. 415-425.

.7          Pavitt, K., Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 1984. 13(6): p. 343-373.

.8          Kaplinsky, R., Globalization, Poverty and Inequality: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. 2005, Cambridge: Polity.

.9          Chalmers, A., What Is This Thing Called Science? 1999: Hackett Publishing Company.

.10        Pavitt, K., Social Shaping of National Science base. Research Policy, 1998. 27(8): p. 793-805.

.11        Martin, B., A. Salter, and D. Hicks, The Relationship Between Publicly Funded Basic Research and Economic Performance. 1996, Brighton: University of Sussex.

.12        Martin, B. and P. Nightingale, The Political Economy of Science, Technology and Innovation. 2000: Edward Elgar.

.13        Lundvall, B.-A. and S. Borras, Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, and R. Nelson, Editors. 2005, Oxford University Press: New York.

.14        Technology Strategy Developing UK Capability, T.S. Board, Editor. 2006, Technology Strategy Board.

.15        DIUS, Science & innovation investment framework 2004 - 2014, DIUS, Editor. 2004.

.16        BERR and DIUS, Supporting innovation in services, D. BERR, Editor. 2008.

.17        Japan's Science and Technology Basic Policy Report, C.f.S.a.T. Policy, Editor. 2005.

.18        Long-term Strategic Guidelines "Innovation 25", G.o. Japan, Editor. 2007.

.19        Strategy for Innovative Technology, C.O. Council for Science and Technology Policy, Editor. 2008.

.20        Yoon, S.-J., National S&T Innovation in Korea. 2006, Asian and Pacific Center for Transfer of Technology: Seoul.

.21        MOST and KISTEP, The Future Perspectives and Technology Foresight of Korea. Challenges and Opportunities. 2005, MOST, KISTEP.

.22        RESEARCH2015-A basis for prioritisation of strategic research, T.a.I. The Ministry of Science, Editor. 2008.

.23        INNOVATIIONDENMARK 2007-2010, D.A.f.S.T.a. Innovation, Editor. 2007.

24.        حسين, رحمان سرشت, رئوس برنامه تحول در علوم انساني و اجتماعي ايران. 1382, وزارت علوم تحقيقات و فناوري، معاونت فرهنگي واجتماعي، دفتر برنامه‌ريزي اجتماعي و مطالعات فرهنگي.

.25        Freeman, C., Technology policy and economic performance; lessons from Japan. 1987, London: Frances Printer Publishers. 155.

.26        Malerba, F., Sectoral Systems of Innovation. 2004, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

.27        Aligica, P.D., Institutional and Stakeholder Mapping: Frameworks for Policy Analysis and Institutional Change. Public Organization Review, 2006. 6: p. 79-90.

.28        Mathews, J.A., National systems of economic learning: The case of technology diffusion management in East Asia. International Journal of Technology Management, 2001. 22(5/6).

.29        Viotti, E.B., National Learning Systems: A new approach on technological change in late industrializing economies and evidences from the cases of Brazil and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2002. 69: p. 653-680.

.30        Mowery, D. and N. Rosenberg, The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies. Research Policy, 1979. 8(2): p. 102-153.

.31        OECD(1992, Innovation Manual, OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry: Paris.

.32        Freeman, C. and L. Soete. Developing Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators: The Twenty-First Century Challenges. in Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators in a Changing World: Responding to Policy Needs. 2006. Ottawa: OECD.

.33        Porter, A., et al., TECHNOLOGY FUTURES ANALYSIS:TOWARD INTEGRATION OF THE FIELD & NEW METHODS. 2003, Technology Futures Analysis Methods Working Group.

.34        Martin, B. and R. Johnston, Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system: experiences in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1999. 60(1)..

.35        Toivonen, M., Foresight in Services: Possibilities and Special Challenges. The Service Industries Journal, 2004. 24(1): p. 79-98.