科技计划经济社会影响评价的回报模型:基本原理、发展动态及启示

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1441 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要回报模型是当前国际上最主流的科技计划经济社会影响评价模型之一,为评价科技计划产生的经济社会影响提供了一套包含七个阶段、五类影响的评价框架和基本方法。为了推动中国对科技计划的经济社会影响评价从理念阶段迈入理论和实证阶段,本研究以国际上回报模型在生物医学领域的若干典型实践为案例,阐述该模型的基本原理、典型方法和发展动态,提出回报模型对中国发展和完善科技计划经济社会影响评价的建议。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	白波
	王艳芳
	肖小溪

关键词 ：科技计划, 回报模型, 原理, 动态

Abstract：As one of the most frequently used models in assessing societal impact of science and technology projects,payback model provides a theoretical framework with 7 stages of delivering impact and 5 categories of outcome.Nowadays,societal impact evaluation in China is still on the level of philosophy.In order to promote Chinese theoretical and empirical development of societal impact evaluation for science and technology projects,basic theory and methods as well as dynamic trend of payback model were studies in this article.Finally,major inspirations of payback model to evaluate societal impact for Chinese science and technology projects more appropriately were concluded,based on the context of science and technology development in China.

Key words： Science and technology project Payback model Basic theory Dynamic trend

收稿日期: 2018-06-15

PACS:

C931

基金资助:国家自科基金青年基金项目“ ‘融合式研究’的评价理论与实证研究——以生命与健康领域若干重大问题的研究为例”(71804176),中国科学院战略研究与决策支持系统建设专项项目“融合领域的理论、实践和案例”(GHJ-ZLZX-2018-32-2)

作者简介: 白波(1975-),女,黑龙江大庆人,北京城市系统工程研究中心项目管理与评估部主任,副研究员;研究方向:医学科技发展战略、项目评估等。

引用本文:

白波, 王艳芳, 肖小溪. 科技计划经济社会影响评价的回报模型:基本原理、发展动态及启示[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2019(6): 17-23.
Bai Bo, Wang Yanfang, Xiao Xiaoxi. “Payback Model”in Evaluating Societal Impact of Science and Technology Projects:Basic Theory,Dynamic Trend and Its Inspiration to China. , 2019(6): 17-23.

链接本文:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/CN/Y2019/I6/17

[1]白春礼.以重大成果产出为导向改革科技评价 [J].中国科学院院刊,2012,27(4):407-410.
[2]徐芳,李晓轩.跨越科技评价的“马拉河” [J].中国科学院院刊,2017,32(8):879-886.
[3]BANZI R.Conceptual frameworks and empirical approaches used to assess the impact of health research:an overview of reviews [J].Health research policy and systems,2011,9:26-35[4]MILAT A J,BAUMAN A E,REDMAN S.A narrative review of research impact assessment models and methods [J].Health research policy and systems,2015,13:18-24.
[5]GREENHALGH T,RAFTERY J,HANNEY S,et al.Research impact:a narrative review [J].Medicine,2016,14:78-93.
[6]KLAUTZER L,HANNEY S,NASON E,et al.Assessing policy and practice impacts of social science research:the application of the payback framework to assess the future of work programme [J].Research evaluation,2011,20(3):201-209.
[7]HENSHALL C.The impact of payback research:developing and using evidence in policy [J].Research evaluation,2011,20(3):257-258.
[8]MORTON S.Progressing research impact assessment:a′contributions′approach [J].Research evaluation,2015,24:405-419.
[9]周建中.科技项目中社会影响评议准则的内涵与启示 [J].科学学研究,2012,30(12):1795-1801.
[10]宓众.科技项目社会经济效益后评估研究 [D].武汉:武汉理工大学,2006.
[11]张莉萍.科技项目社会经济效益综合评价研究 [D].武汉:武汉理工大学,2005.
[12]卫萍,任建萍,杨再峰,等.医学科技计划绩效评价的研究综述 [J].卫生软科学,2012,26(8):704-706.
[13]王玥,陈飞,徐水珠.医学科研项目验收评价指标体系的理论基础研究 [J].江苏科技信息,2015,23:65-68.
[14]白波,王艳芳.基于逻辑模型和回报模型的医学科技计划绩效评估框架构建 [J].技术与创新管理,2015,36(2):131-137.
[15]BUXTON M,HANNEY S.How can payback from health services research be assessed[J].Journal of health service research and policy,1996,1:35-43.
[16]WOODING S,HANNEY S,BUXTON M,et al.Payback arising from research funding:evaluation of the arthritis research campaign [J].Rheumatology,2005,44:1145-1156.
[17]HANNEY S R,WATT A,JONES T H,et al.Conducting retrospective impact analysis to inform a medical research charity′s funding strategies:the case of Asthma UK [J].Allergy,asthma & clinical immunology,2013,9:17-28.
[18]COHEN G.Does health intervention research have real world policy and practice impacts:testing a new impact assessment tool [J].Health research policy and systems,2015,13:3-14.
[19]YAZDIZADEH B.Impact assessment of Iran′s health technology assessment programme [J].Health research policy and systems,2018,16:15-34.
[20]GUTHRIE S.The impact of the national institute for health research health technology assessment programme,2003-13:a multimethod evaluation [J].Health technology assessment,2015,19(67):1-141.
[21]KWAN P.A systematic evaluation of payback of publicly funded health and health services research in Hong Kong [J].Health services research,2007,7:121-129.
[22]European Commission.Review of public health research projects financed under the commission′s framework programmes for health research(subgroup 1) [EB/OL].(2013-04-01)[2018-05-23].https://ec.europa.eu/research/health/pdf/review-of-public-health-research-projects-subgoup1_en.pdf.
[23]SEARLES A,DORAN C,ATTIA J,et al.An approach to measuring and encouraging research translation and research impact [J].Health research policy and systems,2016,14:60-73.
[24]CAHS.Making an impact:a preferred framework and indicators to measure returns on investment in health research [R].Ottawa,Canada:Canadian Academy of Health Sciences,2009.
[25]BUXTON M,HANNEY S,MORRIS S,et al.Medical research-what's it worth? Estimating the economic benefits from medical research in the UK [R].London(UK):Health Economics Research Group,Office of Health Economics,and RAND Europe,2008.
[26]FRANK C,NASON E.Health research:measuring the social,health and economic benefits [J].Canadian medical association journal,2009,180(5):528-534.