Development of a Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation of Iran’s National System of Science, Technology and Innovation

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Shahid Beheshti University

2 MA (Technology Management), University of Tehran

Abstract

Employment of suitable evaluation frameworks is one of the issues that must be taken into consideration in the national systems of science, technology and innovation. Some sporadic measures have been taken by different organizations in Iran for the evaluation of the condition of science, technology and innovation in the country, but till date no balanced monitoring and evaluation framework has been established to provide the possibility of assessment of the realization of high-level goals and collect up-to-date data about the condition of science, technology and innovation in the country. Attempts have been made in this research to identify and analyze the data existing in the related high-level documents and reports published at international level between 2014 and 2015. Thematic analysis research method was employed for the analysis of the collected data and a proposed framework has been developed. Finally, experts panel was used for the verification and confirmation of the suggested framework. Consequently, a comprehensive and balanced framework of criteria, sub-criteria and indexes was developed for monitory and evaluation of science, technology and innovation. Also, some suggestions have been given for attainment of desirable result in the application of this framework, the most important of which include commitment to organizational support in implementation, realistic division of labor among the concerned institutions and allocation of the necessary resources for collection and analysis of the necessary data.

Keywords

References

1. اخوان، محمد. (1395). گزارش همایش آسیب‌شناسی و موانع تحقق شاخص‌های ملی علم، فنّاوری و نوآوری در توسعه پایدار کشور. در: مجموعه مقالات و مذاکرات همایش آسیب‌شناسی و موانع تحقق شاخص‌های ملی علم، فنّاوری و نوآوری در توسعه پایدار کشور. تهران: مرکز مطالعات علم و فنّاوری فرهنگستان علوم.
2. خیاطیان، محمد صادق. (1395). نظام جامع پایش علم، فنّاوری و نوآوری در ایران. در: مجموعه مقالات و مذاکرات همایش آسیب‌شناسی و موانع تحقق شاخص‌های ملی علم، فنّاوری و نوآوری در توسعه پایدار کشور. تهران: مرکز مطالعات علم و فنّاوری فرهنگستان علوم.
3. دفتر حفظ و نشر آثار حضرت آیت‌الله‌العظمی خامنه‌ای. (29/6/1393). سیاست‌های کلی علم و فنّاوری. Farsi.Khamenei.Ir/News-Content?Id=27599
4. شورای‌عالی انقلاب فرهنگی. (1389). سند نقشه جامع علمی کشور. دبیرخانه شورای‌عالی انقلاب فرهنگی.
5. کنفرانس توسعه و تجارت سازمان ملل متحد. (1395). مروری بر سیاست‌های علم، فنّاوری و نوآوری جمهوری اسلامی ایران. ژنو: انتشارات سازمان ملل متحد.
6. Beer, J. J. (1959). The Emergence of the German Dye Industry. Illinois University Press, Chicago.
7. Belgian Science Policy Office. (2013). Annual Report on Science and Technology Indicators for Belgium 2013. Brussels: Belgian Science Policy Office.
8. Bernal, J. D. (1953). Science and Industry in the Nineteenth Century. Taylor & Francis.
9. Braun, V. & V. Clarke. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3(2).
10. De Solla Price, D. J. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. Columbia University Press.
11. Freeman, C. & L. Soete. (2009). Developing Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators: What We Can Learn From the Past. Research Policy. 38(4). 583-589.
12. Galton, F. (1865). Hereditary Talent and Character. Macmillan’s Magazine. 12(157-166). 318-327.
13. Godin, B. (2003). The Emergence of S&T Indicators: Why Did Governments Supplement Statistics with Indicators?. Research Policy. 32(4). 679-691.
14. Godin, B. (2003). The most Cherished Indicator: Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD). Project on the History of Sociology of S&T Statistics Working Paper, Quebec, Canadian Science and Innovation Indicators Consortium (CSIIC).
15. Godin, B. (2006). Statistics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy: How to Get Relevant Indicator. In. Blue Sky II–What Indicators for Science, Technology and Innovation Policies in the 21st Century. 25-27.
16. Godin, B. (2007). From Eugenics to Scientometrics: Galton, Cattell, and Men of Science. Social Studies of Science. 37(5). 691-728.
17. Gokhberg, L. (2013). Indicators for Science, Technology and Innovation on the Crossroad to Foresight. In Science, Technology and Innovation Policy for the Future (Pp. 257-288). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
18. Grupp, H. & M. E. Mogee. (2004). Indicators for National Science and Technology Policy: How Robust Are Composite Indicators?. Research Policy. 33(9). 1373-1384.
19. Index, G. I. (2015). Global Innovation Index 2015.
20. KISTEP. (2014). The Evaluation of Science and Technology Innovation Capacity 2014. KISTEP.
21. MASTIC, & MOSTI. (2014). Malaysian Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Indicators Report 2013. Putrajaya: MASTIC; MOSTI.
22. Mittal, S. K.; K. S. Momaya. & S. Agrawal. (2013). Longitudinal and Comparative Perspectives on the Competitiveness of Countries: Learning From Technology and the Telecom Sector.
23. National Science Board (US). (2014). Science & Engineering Indicators. National Science Board.
24. National Science Foundation. (2016). About NSF. Retrieved from National Science Foundation: https: //www.nsf.gov/about/
25. NISTEP. (2014). Japanese Science and Technology Indicators 2013. NISTEP.
26. OECD. (1981). The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development: “ Frascati Manual” 1980. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
27. OECD (2001), Report on the Working Party of National Science and Technology Indicators Internal Working Document. Paris.
28. OECD. (2003). The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. Paris.
29. OECD. (2013). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2013. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
30. OECD. (2015). Main Science and Technology Indicators Volume 2015 Issue 1. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
31. Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and Economic Growth.
32. Sirilli, G. (2006). Developing Science and Technology Indicators at the OECD: the NESTI Network. In First PRIME Indicators Conference. Lugano.
33. UNECE. (2005). Background Paper on Development of Indicators to Measure Implementation of the UNECE Strategy for ESD. Ede: UNECE.
34. UNESCO. (2015). STI Statistics and Indicators. UNESCO Institute of Statistics.
35. WTI2. (2012). Science, Technology & Innovation Indicators 2012 Internationalization and Specialization of the Dutch STI System Human Capital Pipeline in Science and Engineering. Wetenschaps, Technologie & Innovatie Indicatoren.
36. Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative Research From Start to Finish. The Guilford Press.
Strategy for Culture
Volume 13, Issue 49
June 2020
Pages 119-154

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics