陈述偏好方法和科技创新政策研究:前景方法

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Research Evaluation Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvad022
Víctor Gómez-Valenzuela
{"title":"陈述偏好方法和科技创新政策研究:前景方法","authors":"Víctor Gómez-Valenzuela","doi":"10.1093/reseval/rvad022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This discussion article explores the ontological and epistemic basis for analysing social preferences in the broader interdisciplinary field of Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) policy studies and its evaluation using stated preference (SP) methods. STI policy studies base their approximations of policy problems on a revealed preference (RP) approach, which analyses economic agents' actual market behaviours based on standardized data sources. SP methods arose as an alternative to address the analysis of public goods for which the market fails to assign prices efficiently and can only be evaluated in hypothetical or contingent situations. In an analytical context of complexity defined by grand societal challenges related to the provision of public goods to be addressed by STI transformative policies, analysing social preferences by SP methods could support a more robust and holistic approach to STI policy analysis and its evaluation, improving the policy-making process and promoting more informed policy mixes and evaluation policy mixes. A kind of Kantian categorical imperative favouring SP methods is discussed based on the new STI policy research agenda on transformative change and supported by axiology around social choice, welfare, and a more participative STI policy governance.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach\",\"authors\":\"Víctor Gómez-Valenzuela\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/reseval/rvad022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This discussion article explores the ontological and epistemic basis for analysing social preferences in the broader interdisciplinary field of Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) policy studies and its evaluation using stated preference (SP) methods. STI policy studies base their approximations of policy problems on a revealed preference (RP) approach, which analyses economic agents' actual market behaviours based on standardized data sources. SP methods arose as an alternative to address the analysis of public goods for which the market fails to assign prices efficiently and can only be evaluated in hypothetical or contingent situations. In an analytical context of complexity defined by grand societal challenges related to the provision of public goods to be addressed by STI transformative policies, analysing social preferences by SP methods could support a more robust and holistic approach to STI policy analysis and its evaluation, improving the policy-making process and promoting more informed policy mixes and evaluation policy mixes. A kind of Kantian categorical imperative favouring SP methods is discussed based on the new STI policy research agenda on transformative change and supported by axiology around social choice, welfare, and a more participative STI policy governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47668,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad022\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了在科学、技术和创新(STI)政策研究的更广泛的跨学科领域中分析社会偏好的本体论和认识论基础,以及使用陈述偏好(SP)方法对其进行评估。科技创新政策研究基于揭示偏好(RP)方法对政策问题进行近似,RP方法基于标准化数据源分析经济主体的实际市场行为。SP方法是作为一种替代方法出现的,用于解决市场无法有效分配价格,只能在假设或偶然情况下进行评估的公共物品分析。在分析复杂性的背景下,与科技创新变革政策所解决的公共产品提供相关的重大社会挑战所定义的复杂性,通过SP方法分析社会偏好可以支持对科技创新政策分析及其评估采取更强有力和更全面的方法,改善决策过程,促进更明智的政策组合和评估政策组合。本文以新的科技创新政策研究议程为基础,在社会选择、福利和更具参与性的科技创新政策治理的价值论支持下,讨论了一种支持SP方法的康德式绝对命令。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach
Abstract This discussion article explores the ontological and epistemic basis for analysing social preferences in the broader interdisciplinary field of Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) policy studies and its evaluation using stated preference (SP) methods. STI policy studies base their approximations of policy problems on a revealed preference (RP) approach, which analyses economic agents' actual market behaviours based on standardized data sources. SP methods arose as an alternative to address the analysis of public goods for which the market fails to assign prices efficiently and can only be evaluated in hypothetical or contingent situations. In an analytical context of complexity defined by grand societal challenges related to the provision of public goods to be addressed by STI transformative policies, analysing social preferences by SP methods could support a more robust and holistic approach to STI policy analysis and its evaluation, improving the policy-making process and promoting more informed policy mixes and evaluation policy mixes. A kind of Kantian categorical imperative favouring SP methods is discussed based on the new STI policy research agenda on transformative change and supported by axiology around social choice, welfare, and a more participative STI policy governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research Evaluation
Research Evaluation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Research Evaluation is a peer-reviewed, international journal. It ranges from the individual research project up to inter-country comparisons of research performance. Research projects, researchers, research centres, and the types of research output are all relevant. It includes public and private sectors, natural and social sciences. The term "evaluation" applies to all stages from priorities and proposals, through the monitoring of on-going projects and programmes, to the use of the results of research.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Methods for measuring social and conceptual dimensions of convergence science Correction to: Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach A tribute to our dearly departed colleague and friend: An introduction to the Special Issue in memory of Prof. Paul Benneworth The legal foundation of responsible research assessment: An overview on European Union and Italy The conflict of impact for early career researchers planning for a future in the academy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1