Economic and Environmental Geology (자원환경지질)

The Korean Society of Economic and Environmental Geology (대한자원환경지질학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Research Evaluation Indicators for Government Supported Research Institutes on Geoscience and Mineral Resources in the New Korean Mission Oriented Evaluation System

임무중심형 종합평가에서 지질자원 분야 출연연구기관의 연구개발 우수성 평가지표 연구

  • Ahn, Eun-Young (Policy Research Division, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM)) ;
  • Kim, Seong-Yong (Policy Research Division, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM)) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Wook (Policy Research Division, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM))
  • 안은영 (한국지질자원연구원 미래정책연구실) ;
  • 김성용 (한국지질자원연구원 미래정책연구실) ;
  • 이재욱 (한국지질자원연구원 미래정책연구실)
  • Received : 2016.07.13
  • Accepted : 2016.08.21
  • Published : 2016.08.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) introduced its new Mission Oriented Evaluation System (MOES) for government affiliated research institutes and Government Supported Research Institutes (GSRI) on science and technology in 2013. The Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) is the first MOES applied Science and Technology (S&T) GSRI, that has research divisions focusing on geoscience and geological surveys, mineral resources extraction and utilization, petroleum extraction and marine mineral research, and geological applied and environment research. In appling the final evaluation of MOES on KIGAM, we found difficulty classifing the concepts of research excellence and risk (innovativeness) in guidelines of Research Evaluation Indicators (REIs) of MSIP. We have developed quantitative and qualitative indicators that can present research excellence and risk (innovativeness) through the KIGAM World Class Laboratory (WCL) strategy and related studies, innovative research and development guidelines of MSIP (2013a) and honorable R&D failure guidelines of MSIP (2013b). We have applied our developed REIs in KIGAM which handles basic research, applied and development research and public services. Therefore, our developed REIs can be effectively applied in every S&T GSRI.

미래창조과학부는 2013년부터 과학기술분야 출연연구기관 및 부처 직할 연구기관에 대해 임무중심형 평가를 도입하였다. 지질학의 기초과학 연구에서 자원개발 활용의 응용 개발연구, 지질 환경 자원정보 제공 및 지질박물관 운영 등의 공공서비스 제공을 수행하는 한국지질자원연구원은 2013년 과학기술분야 출연연구기관 처음으로 임무중심형 평가를 도입한 기관이다. 한국지질자원연구원의 종합평가를 위해 미래창조과학부의 과기분야 출연연구기관 임무중심형 종합평가 지침(MSIP, 2015a)을 분석한 결과, 지침의 연구개발 성과 우수성 평가지표에서 질적 우수성과 도전성 혁신성을 구분하는 세부 방법론이 필요함을 알 수 있었다. 이에 따라 본 연구에서는 과학기술 출연연구기관 임무중심형 종합평가에서 연구개발 성과의 우수성을 평가하기 위한 세부 지표를 제시하였다. 한국지질자원연구원의 세계수준연구실 국제성 평가지표, 미래창조과학부의 혁신도약형 R&D사업 추진 가이드라인과 연구개발 재도전 기회제공을 위한 가이드라인을 활용하여, 연구결과의 질적우수성에서 양적 및 질적 평가지표, 목표도전성에서 연구개발 리스크 및 혁신성 지표를 제시하였다. 이러한 지표는 기초연구에서 응용 개발연구 및 공공서비스 제공을 하는 한국지질자원연구원에서 적용되었으므로, 이후 과학기술 출연연구기관 전반에도 적용가능할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn, E.Y. (2012) R&D Excellence Promoting Policies and Public R&D Evalucation Index, Proceedings of Korea Technology Innovation Society, p.179-192.
  2. Altbach, P.G. (2004) The Costs and Benefits of World-Class Universities, Academe, v.90, n.1, p.20-23. https://doi.org/10.2307/40252583
  3. Cho, I.G. (2013) Promoting Policies for High Risk R&D, KEIT PD Issue report, v.13, n.3, p.97-122.
  4. Cho, Y.D. (2013) Qualitative outcome index for different R&D goals and its application, First public hearing document for improvement of R&D outcome evaluation method, MSIP/KISTEP, p.23-34.
  5. Cho, Y.H., Woo, J.P. and Song, C.H. (2010) Practical analysis of developed bibliometric indicators for evaluation of national R&D programs-case study of World Class University program-, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, v.13, n.3, p.494-512.
  6. Choi, J.W. (2010) Study on the Evaluation Schemes and Promoting Policies for the Progression of the World Class University Program, Korea Research Foundation, 144p.
  7. European Council (2000) Action for Centres of Excellence with a European Dimension, Lisbon: European Council, 5p.
  8. Filippo, D.D., Casani, F. and Sanz-Casado, E. (2015) University excellence initiatives in Spain, a possible strategy for optimising resources and improving local performance, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, In Press.
  9. Heo, J.E., Kim, H.D., Cho, Y.D., Cho, S.M. and Cho, S.R. (2008) Developing Bibliometric Indicators for Analysis & Evaluation of National R&D Programs, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, v.11, n.3, p.376-399.
  10. Inter-Governmental Organization of Related Ministry of South Korea (IGO) (2012) Challenge Promoting Policies for Governmental R&D Projects, 13p.
  11. Kim, S.Y. (2014) Evaluation Policies for Challenge and Creativeness of Governmental R&D, presentation for 15th KISTEP Wendnesday Forum, 54p.
  12. Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP) (2014) Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, Korean Translation of OECD (2002), 282p.
  13. Lee, J.W. (2012) Strategy for Enhancing Core Competency of Geo-Technology: report of the first research year, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM), 166p.
  14. Lee, J.W. (2013) Strategy for Enhancing Core Competency of Geo-Technology: report of the second research year, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM), 136p.
  15. Lee, M.H., Song, G.M. and Lee, H.J. (2013) Improving Basic Research Support and Management System to Induce Creative Research Outcome, Science and Technology Research Institute (STEPI), 169p.
  16. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2013a) Honorable R&D failure guidelines, 13p.
  17. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2013b) Innovative R&D guidelines, 42p.
  18. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2014) Standard Evaluation Index for Governmental R&D Projects, 108p.
  19. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2015a) Mission Oriented Final Evaluation guidelines for Government Supported Research Institute (GSRI) on science and technology, 24p.
  20. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2015b) Mission Oriented Institute Evaluation Mamual, p.105.
  21. Moore, K. and Birkinshaw, J. (1998) Managing Knowledge in Global Service Firms: Centers of Excellence, Academy of Management Executive, v.12, n.4, p.81-92.
  22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2002) Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, OECD, 255p.
  23. Raz T., Shenhar, A. J. and Dvir D. (2002) Risk Management, Project Success, and Technological Uncertainty, R&D Management, v.32, n.2, p.101-109. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00243
  24. Sorensen, M.P., Bloch, C. and Young M. (2015) Excellence in the knowledge-based economy: from scientific to research excellence, European Journal of Higher Education, v.6, n.3, p.217-236.
  25. Tijssen, R. (2003) Scoreboards of research excellence, Research Evaluation, v.12, n.2, p.91-103. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776690
  26. Vertesy, D. and Taratola, S. (2012) Composite indicators of research excellence, WP3 Deliverable, Project ERA_MONITORING, European Council, 60p.
  27. Wang, J., Lin, W. and Huang, Y.H. (2010) A performance-oriented risk management framework for innovative R&D projects, Technovation, v.30, n.11-12, p.601-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2010.07.003