چارچوب تدوین برنامه‌های سیاستی علم، فناوری و نوآوری

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران

2 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت فناوری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران

چکیده

پیچیدگی بالای مسائل حوزه علم، فناوری و نوآوری و دشواری درک نحوه تأثیر سیاست‌های نوآوری از یک سو و اثربخشی اندک یا اثرات نامطلوب بسیاری از برنامه‌های سیاستی موجود در این زمینه از سوی دیگر، لزوم دقت بیشتر در مرحله فرموله کردن و تدوین این سیاست‌ها و موشکافی در انتخاب هر یک از عناصر برنامه‌های سیاستی را مشخص می‌سازد. هنگام تدوین یک سیاست جدید یا در بررسی و نقد سیاست‌های پیشنهادشده و موجود، نیازمند چارچوبی هستیم که عناصر ضروری این برنامه‌ها را مشخص نماید تا امکان تحلیل تناسب این عناصر با یکدیگر فراهم شود. بر این اساس مقاله حاضر به بررسی عناصر ضروری برنامه‌های سیاستی پرداخته و چارچوبی برای تدوین برنامه‌های مذکور بر مبنای این عناصر ارائه می‌دهد. در انتها نیز نحوه کاربرد چارچوب پیشنهادی در نقد برنامه‌های موجود با بررسی برنامه ششم توسعه در بخش علم و فناوری نشان داده شده است.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Framework for STI Policy Programs

نویسندگان [English]

  • Soroush Ghazinoori 1
  • Niloufar Radaei 2
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management & Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
2 Ph.D. Candidate in Technology Management, , Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The complexity of the science, technology and innovation issues and the difficulty of understanding innovation policies effects, on the one hand, and the low effectiveness or undesirable effects of many of the existing policies, on the other hand, highlights the need for more precision in the formulation and selection of each element of them. designing a new policy or reviewing and criticizing proposed or existing policies, needs a framework that specify the essential elements of these policies in order to allow the analysis of the proportionality between their elements. Accordingly, these article examines the essential elements of policy programs and provides a framework for developing these programs based on these elements. Finally, the application of the proposed framework in the criticizing of existing programs is shown by reviewing the Iran's Sixth Development Plan in the field of science and technology.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Policy Design
  • Policy Formulation
  • innovation policy
  • Policy Instrument
  • Policy goals
[1] Howlett, M. (2014). From the ‘old’to the ‘new’policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 187-207.

[2] Linder, S. H., & Peters, B. G. (1988). The analysis of design or the design of analysis?. Review of Policy Research, 7(4), 738-750.

[3] Taeihagh, A., Bañares-Alcántara, R., & Wang, Z. (2009). A novel approach to policy design using process design principles. In Computer aided chemical engineering (Vol. 27, pp. 2049-2054). Elsevier.

[4] Azar, A., Gholamrezaei, H., Danaei Fard, H., & Khodadad Hosseini, H. (2013). Higher Education Policy Analysis in the Fifth Development Plan Using System Dynamics. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 5(4), 1-18. {In Persian}.

[5] Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: the new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy & Politics, 43(2), 291-311.

[6] Bartzokas, A., & Teubal, M. (2002). A framework for policy oriented innovation studies in industrialising countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 11(4-5), 477-496.

[7] Tuominen, A., & Himanen, V. (2007). Assessing the interaction between transport policy targets and policy implementation—A Finnish case study. Transport Policy, 14(5), 388-398.

[8] Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological forecasting and social change, 80(8), 1513-1522.

[9] Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2-23.

[10] Foxon, T., & Pearson, P. (2008). Overcoming barriers to innovation and diffusion of cleaner technologies: some features of a sustainable innovation policy regime. Journal of cleaner production, 16(1), S148-S161.

[11] Sidney, M. S. (2006). Policy formulation: design and tools. In Handbook of public policy analysis (pp. 105-114). Routledge.

[12] Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1988). Systematically pinching ideas: A comparative approach to policy design. Journal of public policy, 8(1), 61-80.

[13] Howlett, M. (2009). Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42(1), 73-89.

[14] Wieczorek, A. J., & Hekkert, M. P. (2012). Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars. Science and Public Policy, 39(1), 74-87.

[15] Ben-Zadok, E. (2013). Policy Change Through Policy Design: Florida Concurrency, 1985–2010. Planning Practice and Research, 28(5), 589-611.

[16] Georghiou, L., & Harper, J. C. (2011). From priority-setting to articulation of demand: Foresight for research and innovation policy and strategy. Futures, 43(3), 243-251.

[17] Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political studies, 44(5), 936-957.

[18] Center for Technology Studies (CTS). (2006). Technology policy and market stimulation: collecting Sanjaya Lall’s opinions. Tehran: Rasa Cultural Services Institute. {In Persian}.

[19] Ghazinoory, S., and Ghazinoori, S. (2017). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Making; An Introduction. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University Publication. {In Persian}.

[20] European commission. (2003). Annual Innovation Policy Trends and Appraisal Report For Turkey, A publication frim the innovation/SMEs Programmemme.

[21] Clark, J., & Guy, K. (1997). Innovation and competitiveness. Technopolis, Brighton.

[22] Bikar, V., CAPRON, H., & CINCERA, M. (2004). An integrated evaluation scheme of innovation systems from an institutional perspective.

[23] Freeman, C. (1987). Technology and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.

[24] Lundvall, B. (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.

[25] Edler, J., Gök, A., Cunningham, P., & Shapira, P. (2016). Introduction: Making sense of innovation policy. In Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact. Edward Elgar Publishing.

[26] Ghazinoori, S., Kazemi, H., Roshani, S., & Radaei, N. (2015). A Review on Policy Objectives and

Instruments in Iran’s S&T Documents. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 7(3), 71-86. {In Persian}.

[27] Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2013). Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design. Politics and Governance, 1(2), 170-182.

[28] Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., & Laranja, M. (2011). Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’for innovation. Research policy, 40(5), 702-713.

[29] Williams, H. (2012). Innovation inducement prizes: Connecting research to policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(3), 752-776.

[30] Jones, B., & Grimshaw, D. (2016). The impact of skill formation policies on innovation. Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact, 108.

[31] Henstra, D. (2016). The tools of climate adaptation policy: analysing instruments and instrument selection. Climate Policy, 16(4), 496-521.

[32] Kotzebue, J. R., Bressers, H. T. A., & Yousif, C. (2010). Spatial misfits in a multi-level renewable energy policy implementation process on the Small Island State of Malta. Energy policy, 38(10), 5967-5976.

[33] Appelt, S., Bajgar, M., Criscuolo, C., & Galindo-Rueda, F. (2016). R&D Tax Incentives: Evidence on design, incidence and impacts.

[34] Hassanlou, K., Fathian, M., Akhavan, P., & Azari, A. (2009). Information technology policy trends in the world. Technology in Society, 31(2), 125-132.