Abstract As an emerging agenda in science and public policy discourse, the open science (OS) movement has affected university–industry research collaboration (UIRC) including normative changes concerning actors’ value and belief systems. Thus, the following questions have become pertinent: what are the norms and beliefs of key actors engaged in UIRC regarding OS practices? How have the norms and beliefs led to tensions in UIRC and dynamics facilitating or impeding OS? This study explores these questions through two case studies by applying institutional logics theory as an analytical lens. Through analysing case studies concerning UIRC in Finland, a pioneer in the global OS movement, six institutional logics that are either pro- or contra-OS practices were identified: the state, market, corporation, profession, traditional trust–based community and sustainability-based community logics. The strongest tensions are between the state and market logics and between the profession and market logics. In the end of the study, recommendations are solicited for OS policymakers and practitioners based on the research findings.
{"title":"Institutional logics in the open science practices of university–industry research collaboration","authors":"Annina Lattu, Yuzhuo Cai","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad037","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As an emerging agenda in science and public policy discourse, the open science (OS) movement has affected university–industry research collaboration (UIRC) including normative changes concerning actors’ value and belief systems. Thus, the following questions have become pertinent: what are the norms and beliefs of key actors engaged in UIRC regarding OS practices? How have the norms and beliefs led to tensions in UIRC and dynamics facilitating or impeding OS? This study explores these questions through two case studies by applying institutional logics theory as an analytical lens. Through analysing case studies concerning UIRC in Finland, a pioneer in the global OS movement, six institutional logics that are either pro- or contra-OS practices were identified: the state, market, corporation, profession, traditional trust–based community and sustainability-based community logics. The strongest tensions are between the state and market logics and between the profession and market logics. In the end of the study, recommendations are solicited for OS policymakers and practitioners based on the research findings.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135524943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has created unprecedented challenges for policymakers and scientific experts charged with preventing the spread of the virus. In upending the usual mechanisms for political deliberation, the pandemic offers a window into the co-production of governmental policy decisions and scientific evidence. Taking the German state of Bavaria as a case study, this article draws on expert interviews with individuals directly involved in high-level pandemic decision-making to explore the changing relationships between policymakers and scientific experts. The challenges that emerged in the Bavarian context illustrate that while uncertainty has long been understood as constitutive of scientific knowledge, it became a stumbling block for policymakers due to newfound degrees of urgency and implications of decision-making in relation to the pandemic. In order to better address the emergent, evolving problems posed by public health crises, uncertainty must also be understood as formative in the work of policy.
{"title":"Responding to uncertainty in the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives from Bavaria, Germany","authors":"A. Fiske, Johannes Lange, A. Buyx, S. McLennan","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad031","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has created unprecedented challenges for policymakers and scientific experts charged with preventing the spread of the virus. In upending the usual mechanisms for political deliberation, the pandemic offers a window into the co-production of governmental policy decisions and scientific evidence. Taking the German state of Bavaria as a case study, this article draws on expert interviews with individuals directly involved in high-level pandemic decision-making to explore the changing relationships between policymakers and scientific experts. The challenges that emerged in the Bavarian context illustrate that while uncertainty has long been understood as constitutive of scientific knowledge, it became a stumbling block for policymakers due to newfound degrees of urgency and implications of decision-making in relation to the pandemic. In order to better address the emergent, evolving problems posed by public health crises, uncertainty must also be understood as formative in the work of policy.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45775996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Taru Peltola, Sanna-Riikka Saarela, Juha M. Kotilainen, Tapio Litmanen, J. Lukkarinen, Ismo Pölönen, Outi Ratamäki, H. Saarikoski, M. Salo, S. Vikström
While societies are facing complex problems involving multiple stakeholders and interdependencies, interest in collaborative governance as a potential solution is rising. Research-based interventions in policy, planning, and management processes have been introduced to test different approaches and tools for collaboration. The nature of these processes, tools, and approaches varies substantially, as do researchers’ cultures of making contributions to and in collaboration with society. This paper outlines the various possibilities and means for researchers to intervene in and explore steps towards collaborative governance. It utilises literature-based descriptions of potential roles for researchers and draws on insight from Finnish collaborative governance interventions in environmental decision-making. The conventional role of researchers as providers of knowledge was complemented with roles needed to foster favourable conditions for collaboration. Tensions regarding these roles show that collaborative governance requires a reflexive position from researchers, enabling them to adapt their ideas about collaboration to specific governance settings.
{"title":"Researcher roles in collaborative governance interventions","authors":"Taru Peltola, Sanna-Riikka Saarela, Juha M. Kotilainen, Tapio Litmanen, J. Lukkarinen, Ismo Pölönen, Outi Ratamäki, H. Saarikoski, M. Salo, S. Vikström","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad034","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 While societies are facing complex problems involving multiple stakeholders and interdependencies, interest in collaborative governance as a potential solution is rising. Research-based interventions in policy, planning, and management processes have been introduced to test different approaches and tools for collaboration. The nature of these processes, tools, and approaches varies substantially, as do researchers’ cultures of making contributions to and in collaboration with society. This paper outlines the various possibilities and means for researchers to intervene in and explore steps towards collaborative governance. It utilises literature-based descriptions of potential roles for researchers and draws on insight from Finnish collaborative governance interventions in environmental decision-making. The conventional role of researchers as providers of knowledge was complemented with roles needed to foster favourable conditions for collaboration. Tensions regarding these roles show that collaborative governance requires a reflexive position from researchers, enabling them to adapt their ideas about collaboration to specific governance settings.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45266215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Anna-Lena Rüland, Nicolas Rüffin, Katharina Cramer, P. Ngabonziza, Manoj Saxena, Stefan Skupien
Intergovernmental science organizations (IGSOs) address many challenges of the 21st century. Several countries of the Global South have joined established IGSOs or have created new ones. Yet we know little about their interests in IGSOs. Our study addresses this blind spot by investigating which objectives Southern actors pursue in IGSOs and under which conditions they are likely to achieve their objectives. Using insights from three strands of literature, we compare four IGSOs with Southern participation: the European Organization for Nuclear Research, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, the Square Kilometer Array, and the African Lightsource. We show that countries of the Global South pursue a multitude of political and scientific objectives in IGSOs, ranging from capacity-building to casting off political isolation. Moreover, we demonstrate that Southern countries have varying chances of attaining these objectives, depending on their scientific community, domestic politics, industrial capacities and in some cases geographic location as well as an IGSO’s maturity.
{"title":"Science diplomacy from the Global South: the case of intergovernmental science organizations","authors":"Anna-Lena Rüland, Nicolas Rüffin, Katharina Cramer, P. Ngabonziza, Manoj Saxena, Stefan Skupien","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Intergovernmental science organizations (IGSOs) address many challenges of the 21st century. Several countries of the Global South have joined established IGSOs or have created new ones. Yet we know little about their interests in IGSOs. Our study addresses this blind spot by investigating which objectives Southern actors pursue in IGSOs and under which conditions they are likely to achieve their objectives. Using insights from three strands of literature, we compare four IGSOs with Southern participation: the European Organization for Nuclear Research, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, the Square Kilometer Array, and the African Lightsource. We show that countries of the Global South pursue a multitude of political and scientific objectives in IGSOs, ranging from capacity-building to casting off political isolation. Moreover, we demonstrate that Southern countries have varying chances of attaining these objectives, depending on their scientific community, domestic politics, industrial capacities and in some cases geographic location as well as an IGSO’s maturity.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44755824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Science diplomacy in the Global South—an introduction","authors":"Derya Büyüktanir Karacan, Pierre-Bruno Ruffini","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad028","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48339066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
How do entrepreneurs of high-growth firms in small, open economies evaluate innovation policy mixes? In response to market consolidation by large firms, governments in such countries are using a mix of innovation policy tools to support firms with high-growth potential in digitally intensive sectors. Government objectives, however, are not being realized. Bringing actor-centric perspectives to the policy mix literature, we analyze interviews with entrepreneurs from Canadian technology firms to determine whether there is a disconnect between the objectives and instruments employed by the government. With distinct policy preferences rooted in their growth experiences specific to the country’s political economy, we find that scale-up entrepreneurs prefer a more active role of the government in the form of demand-side, direct, and targeted innovation instruments. The findings presented in this article provide a more nuanced understanding of the innovation policy landscape and the preferences of technology scale-up firms
{"title":"Do winners pick government? How scale-up experience shapes entrepreneurs’ assessments of innovation policy mixes","authors":"S. Denney, Travis Southin, David A. Wolfe","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad030","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 How do entrepreneurs of high-growth firms in small, open economies evaluate innovation policy mixes? In response to market consolidation by large firms, governments in such countries are using a mix of innovation policy tools to support firms with high-growth potential in digitally intensive sectors. Government objectives, however, are not being realized. Bringing actor-centric perspectives to the policy mix literature, we analyze interviews with entrepreneurs from Canadian technology firms to determine whether there is a disconnect between the objectives and instruments employed by the government. With distinct policy preferences rooted in their growth experiences specific to the country’s political economy, we find that scale-up entrepreneurs prefer a more active role of the government in the form of demand-side, direct, and targeted innovation instruments. The findings presented in this article provide a more nuanced understanding of the innovation policy landscape and the preferences of technology scale-up firms","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47181337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The urgent need to accelerate on, and make a national success of, the green and digital transition is leading to widespread calls for greater government involvement in the economy, including by means of an active industrial policy. After reviewing several case studies, it becomes evident that, against conventional wisdom, nearly all countries have systematically engaged in some form of industrial policy, especially large economies like the USA and China, notwithstanding their very different economic models. The same is true for Europe, both at the national level and through European Union policies. After analysing these experiences, we draw six key policy lessons to inform future debates on how to shape a successful industrial policy in the years to come and mitigate its risks, while acting in a context of souring geopolitical tensions.
{"title":"European industrial policy for the green and digital revolution","authors":"Alessio Terzi, Monika Sherwood, Aneil Singh","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad018","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The urgent need to accelerate on, and make a national success of, the green and digital transition is leading to widespread calls for greater government involvement in the economy, including by means of an active industrial policy. After reviewing several case studies, it becomes evident that, against conventional wisdom, nearly all countries have systematically engaged in some form of industrial policy, especially large economies like the USA and China, notwithstanding their very different economic models. The same is true for Europe, both at the national level and through European Union policies. After analysing these experiences, we draw six key policy lessons to inform future debates on how to shape a successful industrial policy in the years to come and mitigate its risks, while acting in a context of souring geopolitical tensions.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41637050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sam Robinson, M. Adamson, Gordon Barrett, L. Jacobsen, S. Turchetti, A. Homei, P. Marton, L. Aronowsky, Iqra Choudry, Johan Gärdebo, Jaehwan Hyun, Gerardo Ienna, Carringtone Kinyanjui, Beatriz Martínez-Rius, Júlia Mascarello, Doubravka Olšáková, Giulia Rispoli, Waqar H. Zaidi
The early 1970s brought fundamental transitions in international scientific collaboration that significantly affected the international relations in global patterns that are still relevant today. This article uses a multi-perspective approach to argue that the underlying condition for the globalization of science diplomacy was the increasing participation of recently independent countries in international technoscientific affairs, examining critical research areas, including space exploration, oceanography, nuclear technoscience, the environmental sciences, and health and population studies. Themes emerged at that time that continue to characterize what we term ‘Global Science Diplomacy’: multipolarity, resistance and agency, lack of global consensus, regional alliances and interests, and the centrality of the United Nations system to the conduct of transnational science. This survey is a first step in historical reflection on this phenomenon and shows that it was the emergence of the Global South in Science Diplomacy affairs that made Science Diplomacy global at the beginning of the 1970s.
{"title":"The globalization of science diplomacy in the early 1970s: a historical exploration","authors":"Sam Robinson, M. Adamson, Gordon Barrett, L. Jacobsen, S. Turchetti, A. Homei, P. Marton, L. Aronowsky, Iqra Choudry, Johan Gärdebo, Jaehwan Hyun, Gerardo Ienna, Carringtone Kinyanjui, Beatriz Martínez-Rius, Júlia Mascarello, Doubravka Olšáková, Giulia Rispoli, Waqar H. Zaidi","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad026","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The early 1970s brought fundamental transitions in international scientific collaboration that significantly affected the international relations in global patterns that are still relevant today. This article uses a multi-perspective approach to argue that the underlying condition for the globalization of science diplomacy was the increasing participation of recently independent countries in international technoscientific affairs, examining critical research areas, including space exploration, oceanography, nuclear technoscience, the environmental sciences, and health and population studies. Themes emerged at that time that continue to characterize what we term ‘Global Science Diplomacy’: multipolarity, resistance and agency, lack of global consensus, regional alliances and interests, and the centrality of the United Nations system to the conduct of transnational science. This survey is a first step in historical reflection on this phenomenon and shows that it was the emergence of the Global South in Science Diplomacy affairs that made Science Diplomacy global at the beginning of the 1970s.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41961382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Based on International Relations (IRs) grounding theories, this article outlines a realist-constructivist perspective in science diplomacy when assessing a nation-state’s foreign policy decision-making and behaviour. The proposed theoretical framing helps us evaluate existing practices of science diplomacy within the larger context of IRs and allows us to better understand the increasing role of science diplomacy and its potency in the foreign policy of emerging and developing countries. The proposed exploratory research methodology outlines the contours of a science diplomacy reading grid breaking it down into the categories of objectives, strategic drivers, and tools. The data collection and semi-structured interviews with high-ranking practitioners and experts allowed us to assess the meaning of science diplomacy as understood and implemented by Global South countries and to distinguish science diplomacy practices as oriented towards the satisfaction of domestic needs and international positioning.
{"title":"Science diplomacy from a nation-state’s perspective: a general framing and its application to Global South countries","authors":"Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, O. Krasnyak","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad023","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Based on International Relations (IRs) grounding theories, this article outlines a realist-constructivist perspective in science diplomacy when assessing a nation-state’s foreign policy decision-making and behaviour. The proposed theoretical framing helps us evaluate existing practices of science diplomacy within the larger context of IRs and allows us to better understand the increasing role of science diplomacy and its potency in the foreign policy of emerging and developing countries. The proposed exploratory research methodology outlines the contours of a science diplomacy reading grid breaking it down into the categories of objectives, strategic drivers, and tools. The data collection and semi-structured interviews with high-ranking practitioners and experts allowed us to assess the meaning of science diplomacy as understood and implemented by Global South countries and to distinguish science diplomacy practices as oriented towards the satisfaction of domestic needs and international positioning.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47208753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. F. Echeverría-King, Aura Fossati, N. Raja, Kleinsy Bonilla, B. Urbani, R. K. Whiffen, Tereza Vizinová
International collaborations show asymmetries and imbalances that influence how countries take part in international relations. In this context, science diplomacy (SD) could offer possibilities towards building partnerships and meaningful engagement between Europe and Latin America. The purpose of this article is to analyse how scientific collaborations between Latin American and European researchers are carried out, observing trends, behaviours, and perceptions. Qualitative methodologies and the analysis of empirical data collected through a survey allow the extraction of relevant experiences from real cases of international joint projects. Findings indicate that addressing the asymmetries in the collaboration between partnering researchers from Europe and Latin America is essential, and SD approaches may facilitate such endeavour. SD may not represent a panacea; however, it seems to facilitate the internationalisation of research in terms of mobility, international scientific collaborations, and knowledge exchange with under-represented actors in traditional international scientific schemes, such as indigenous communities.
{"title":"Scientific collaborations between Latin America and Europe: an approach from science diplomacy towards international engagement","authors":"L. F. Echeverría-King, Aura Fossati, N. Raja, Kleinsy Bonilla, B. Urbani, R. K. Whiffen, Tereza Vizinová","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad025","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 International collaborations show asymmetries and imbalances that influence how countries take part in international relations. In this context, science diplomacy (SD) could offer possibilities towards building partnerships and meaningful engagement between Europe and Latin America. The purpose of this article is to analyse how scientific collaborations between Latin American and European researchers are carried out, observing trends, behaviours, and perceptions. Qualitative methodologies and the analysis of empirical data collected through a survey allow the extraction of relevant experiences from real cases of international joint projects. Findings indicate that addressing the asymmetries in the collaboration between partnering researchers from Europe and Latin America is essential, and SD approaches may facilitate such endeavour. SD may not represent a panacea; however, it seems to facilitate the internationalisation of research in terms of mobility, international scientific collaborations, and knowledge exchange with under-represented actors in traditional international scientific schemes, such as indigenous communities.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46633988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：