Abstract：Disruptive technology is known as a revolutionary force that can change the rules of the game,and has attracted extensive attention from all over the world.Many countries have also actively deployed disruptive technology projects.At present,the selection of national-level scientific research projects is based on the peer review mechanism,which has a long history but is also quite controversial.It is worth studying how to make full use of the advantages of peer review to effectively evaluate disruptive technology projects.At first,it summarizes the development and application of peer review mechanism.Then based on the characteristics of disruptive technology projects,it puts forward the methods of improving the peer review mechanism.Finally,it elaborates the practical experience of improving peer review in some scientific research funding agencies for project selection.
李曼迪, 赵筱媛, 刘晓娟. 颠覆性技术项目中同行评议机制改进思路与国际实践[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2021(12): 182-188.
Li Mandi, Zhao Xiaoyuan, Liu Xiaojuan. Improvement Methods and Practice of Peer Review for Disruptive Technology Projects. , 2021(12): 182-188.
[1]BOWER J L,CHRISTENSEN C M.Disruptive technologies:catching the wave[J].Harvard business review,1995,73 (1):43-53. [2]Disruptive civil technologies:six technologies with potential impacts on US interests out to 2025[R].National Intelligence Council (U.S.),2008. [3]TECHNOLOGIES C,SCIENCES E P,COUNCIL N.Persistent forecasting of disruptive technologies-report 2[R].The National Academy Press,2010. [4]荆象新,锁兴文,耿义峰.颠覆性技术发展综述及若干启示[J].国防科技,2015,36 (3):11-13. [5]刘安蓉,李莉,曹晓阳,等.颠覆性技术概念的战略内涵及政策启示[J].中国工程科学,2018,20 (6):1-128. [6]龚旭.科学基金与创新性研究——美国国家科学基金会支持变革性研究的相关政策分析[J].中国科学基金,2011,25 (2):105-110. [7]孔红梅,刘天星,段靖.同行评议初探[J].生态环境学报,2010,19 (4):1004-1008. [8]张琳,SIVERTSEN Gunnar.科学计量与同行评议相结合的科研评价——国际经验与启示[J].情报学报,2020,39 (8):806-816. [9]吴述尧.同行评议方法论[M].北京:科学出版社,1996. [10]吴述尧.同行评议方法不可取代[J].科技导报,2014,32 (32):89. [11]盛怡瑾,初景利.同行评议质量控制方法研究进展[J].出版科学,2018,26 (5):46-53. [12]龚旭.科学政策与同行评议[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2009. [13]李礼.美国学术同行评议制度研究——基于学术规范的视角[D].北京:北京师范大学,2011. [14]龚旭.同行评议公正性的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2004,22 (6):613-618. [15]王志田.科研立项同行专家评议的公正性及其影响因素[J].研究与发展管理,1992 (4):64-66. [16]张彦.论同行评议的改进[J].社会科学研究,2008 (3):86-91. [17]贺颖.基于科学计量视角的同行评议专家遴选问题研究[D].天津:天津大学,2008. [18]张璐杰,张小秋.国外科研资助机构同行评议质量控制机制及启示[J].科技进步与对策,2017,34 (11):114-117. [19]库恩,李宝恒,纪树立.科学革命的结构[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,1980. [20]王平.同行评议制的固有缺点与局限性[J].科技管理研究,1994 (4):22-26. [21]江虎军,徐岩英,朱蔚彤,等.同行评议制度的公正性与局限性[J].中国科学基金,2019,33 (4):403-406. [22]National Science Board.Enhancing support of transformative research at the national science foundation[R/OL]. (2007-03-30).https://nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2007/tr_draft.pdf. [23]樊春良,李东阳,樊天.美国国家科学基金会对融合研究的资助及启示[J].中国科学院院刊,2020,35 (1):19-26. [24]王勇,汪华登,唐成华.非共识项目的评审机制探讨与建议[J].中国科学基金,2012,26 (2):74-78. [25]苏鹏,苏成,潘云涛.基于历史案例的颠覆性技术特征分析[J].中国科技论坛,2019 (8):1-9. [26]RAND Corporation.Alternatives to peer review in research project funding[R].Cambridge:RAND Europe,2013. [27]KEHRER B H,AIKEN L H,BLENDON R J,et al.The research program and priorities of the Robert Wood Johnson foundation[J].Health services research,1984,19 (4):439. [28]龚旭.美国私人基金会及其支持科学事业的考察[J].自然辩证法通讯,2003,25 (4):45-54. [29]ORLEANS C T,LEVITON L C,THOMAS K A,et al.History of the Robert Wood Johnson foundation's active living research program:origins and strategy[J].American journal of preventive medicine,2009,36 (2):S1-S9. [30]Canadian Nurses Foundation[EB/OL]. (2021-06-17).https://cnf-fiic.ca/. [31]Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency[EB/OL]. (2020-11-17).https://www.darpa.mil/. [32]曹晓阳,魏永静,李莉,等.DARPA的颠覆性技术创新及其启示[J].中国工程科学,2018,20 (6):1-128. [33]郝君超,王海燕,李哲.DARPA科研项目组织模式及其对中国的启示[J].科技进步与对策,2015,32 (9):6-9.
2021, 
