科研管理

科研管理 ›› 2011, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (3): 159-164 .

• 论文 • 上一篇    

科学基金高风险探索性项目的评议机制研究

王悦1,2，李晓轩1，郑永和3   

  1. (1.中国科学院科技政策与管理科学研究所,北京100190；
    2.天津财经大学，天津300222；3.国家自然科学基金委员会计划局，北京100085）
  • 收稿日期:2010-06-07 修回日期:2010-12-22 出版日期:2011-03-27 发布日期:2011-04-15

Reviewing mechanism for the assessment of high-risk exploratory research projects in science foundation

Wang Yue1,2， Li Xiaoxuan1， Zheng Yonghe3   

  1. (1.Institute of Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China；
    2.Tianjin University of Finance and Economics, Tianjin 300222, China；
    3.Bureau of Planning, National Nature Science Foundation of China, Beijing 100085, China）
  • Received:2010-06-07 Revised:2010-12-22 Online:2011-03-27 Published:2011-04-15

PDF

2891

摘要： 摘要：本文分析、比较了国外著名科学资助机构近年来有关高风险探索性项目的典型评议机制，在借鉴其经验的基础上，结合我国科学基金的实际，提出了一种互动启发式评议机制。该机制依托专门的会议论坛为评议平台，通过申请者与评审者现场交流、讨论与交锋，在互动中实时遴选出值得资助的项目。互动启发式评议机制能够克服传统同行评议方式在遴选高风险探索性项目时的保守性缺位等不足，成为传统同行评议方式的扩展与补充。

关键词: 高风险探索性项目, 同行评议, 科学基金, 评议机制

Abstract: Abstract: Several typical reviewing mechanisms for the assessment of high-risk exploratory research projects in famous foreign science funding agencies are compared and analyzed. On this basis, combined with the actual conditions of National Nature Science Foundation of China, an interactive heuristic reviewing mechanism is proposed. This mechanism relies on a special forum，by means of instant argument and confrontation between applicants and reviewers, the projects that are worth supporting are identified. This interactive heuristic reviewing mechanism overcomes the shortcoming of traditional peer review mechanism when it is used to identify exploratory pioneering projects often conservativeness falls vacant. The proposed mechanism could become a complementary and extension mechanism for peer review.

Key words: high-risk exploratory research project, peer review, science foundation, reviewing mechanism

中图分类号: