• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2017.11a
• /
• pp.159-169
• /
• 2017

정부는 R&D 재원의 전략적인 투자를 위해 199년에 국가과학기술위원회를 설치한 이후, R&D 예산 배분 조정을 지속적으로 추진하면서 개별 사업에 대한 예산조정 이전에 투자우선순위를 설정하였다. 그러나 그간의 투자우선순위 설정은 중장기 투자전략, 기본계획 등을 근거로 하기 때문에 중점적으로 투자해야 할 기술분야에 대해 정성적인 언급에만 머무를 수밖에 없고, 현재 연구트렌드를 반영하기 어려위 실제 R&D 예산 배분 시 구체적인 연계성이 부족한 실정이다. 이에 본 논문에서는 나노분야 R&D를 중심으로 키워드를 활용한 트렌드 분석을 통해 정부 R&D 예산 배분의 전략성을 제고할 수 있으며, 사업의 투자규모를 설정하는데 있어 투자우선순위와의 연관도를 높이는 방안을 제시하고자 한다.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.57-83
• /
• 2011

We suggested industry-specific priorities of R&D investment with R&D investment elasticity to GDP calculated from the ripple effect of 28 large-sized industry R&D investment, using a Computable General Equilibrium(CGE) Model. Priority orders apply to only 12 industries, because 16 industries with less than 1% of total investment have been excluded. First, R&D investment elasticity to GDP says that priorities are ordered as Basic metal products, Chemicals, drugs and medicines, Food, beverages and tobacco products, Electronic and electrical equipment, Transportation equipment, Precision instruments, Electrictity, gas, steam and water supply, General machinery and equipment, Communications and broadcasting, Construction, Other services, and Real estate and business services. These priorities show the status quo of Korean industry structures well. The GDP growth rate to 2030 year reference equilibrium, which is an auxiliary index, says a similar priority to results from R&D investment elasticity to GDP. In the end, two criteria of priority order can be functioned as a good index for National Science and Technology Commission deciding what industry to invest and what budget to allocate.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.12 no.12
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2014

This article has reviewed some possible factors of priority setting in the government R&D investment, and also reviewed the roles of scientific community. Recently many development countries have planned more and more large-scale researches which require huge resources. Many large-scale researches have presented strikingly poor performance records in terms of efficiency. Nevertheless, more and more large-scale researches have been selected and executed. According to this article, some factors such as attracting attention of the media and the public, enhancing national prestige, raising the technological independence for economic growth were raised. As implications for policy, this article presented a necessity of strengthening the public control for priority setting of government R&D investment. And new procedures such as public discourse and National Assembly's in-depth deliberation were presented.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.537-547
• /
• 2017

현재 우리나라의 GDP 대비 R&D 투자 규모는 세계최고의 수준에 이르렀다. 이러한 연구개발 예산의 양적인 확대 및 성장과 함께 상대적으로 연구개발 예산의 효율적 활용이 중요한 과학기술정책 이슈로 부각되고 있다. 본 연구는 정부 R&D사업 유사영역의 효율성 제고를 위한 정책, 전략의 수립 및 실행의 의사결정을 돕는 데이터 기반의 객관적인 지표들을 제시하였다. 그 후 본 연구에서 제시한 효율성 지표들을 NTIS에서 추출한 2015년 정부출연연구기관 R&D 사업 데이터와 연계하여 실질적으로 측정과 사용이 가능한 정량적 지표들만을 따로 선별하였다. 또한 정부 R&D사업 효율성 지표들의 가중치를 측정하기 위하여 계층분석기법(analytic hierarchy process)을 수행하였으며 계층분석기법의 결과로 나온 가중치를 효율성 지표들에 적용하여 과제 우선순위를 도출하였다. 이를 통해 정책의 수립, 실행 및 조정 시 고려해야 할 지표의 우선순위를 설정하여 유사연구영역 관련 정부 R&D 정책수립에서 실행까지의 연계를 강화시키고 국가적으로 한정된 자원의 효율적 사용을 위한 방안을 제시하였다.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.889-914
• /
• 2011

This paper is to review assessment indicator on priorities for budget allocation of the national R&D program. In priority setting of programs for the budget allocation process of the national R&D program using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), the survey result on the major influencing factors is as follows: the significance of components of evaluation for the priority of the national R&D programs in budget allocation was as following order: "accomplishment and ripple effect of the project," "basis and driving force for the promotion of project," "feasibility of project goals," and the "possibility of overlapping and linkage among projects". The importance of the final evaluation indicator was as following order: "clarity and possibility for accomplishment of business objectives," "ripple effects in terms of science and technology", "ripple effects in terms of the economy and overall society" and "appropriate correspondence with mid- to long-term plans" (the importance for these four indicators was over 10%) while the importance of "overlapping" and "appropriateness of budget size" indicators which fell below 5% were considered to be relatively less important. there is a need for a clear criteria and conceptions of evaluation indicators for budget allocation of national R&D programs.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.436-446
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to examine the priorities of innovation activities, business performance, and maximization factors of SMEs. Support programs for each government department are operated by various industries. Various supports, including subsidies, grants, marketing, planning, and education, are provided to each company. Therefore, this study aims to analyze and identify the priorities of innovation activities that have a positive effect on business performance. The efficacy of the proposed model and the psychometric properties of structure were analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The hierarchical structure of corporate innovation activities are composed of 'R&D' and 'government support', and 'Inside R&D, Outsourcing R &D, Consortium R&D'. As a result of analyzing companies that received more than one type of R&D government support, it can be seen that 'government support' (72.1%) is more important than 'research and development' (27.8%). In addition, this study found key sub-factors loadings including Assistant Support (30.1%), Tax Support (22.7%), Funding Support (18.8%), Inside R&D (10.8%), Outsourcing R&D (10.3%), and Consortium R&D (7.2%). Analysis results suggest that the priorities of detailed innovation activities of R&D and government support affect product innovation and process innovation, which in turn, influence business performance and maximization of SMEs. This implies that SMEs who want to participate in the government support project will be helpful in setting the direction of innovation activities. This study also suggests the importance of strategic priorities among the decision elements for CEOs.

• Journal of the military operations research society of Korea
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.122-132
• /
• 2004

The aim of this paper is to show the process of R&D Project-Priority Ordering in the Defense Technology field. We propose specific methods (Delphi, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Scoring) to order the R&D Project-Priority. In general, to decide the priority of R&D projects most of researches depend on questionnaires which are surveyed by experts. However, it is criticized that this process cannot reflect the limitation of experience and knowledge of experts. In this process, we separate evaluators in two parts: the first is strategic experts, the second is technical experts. Evaluators can choose and evaluate the alternatives which they are familiar with, so we can obtain reliable results. Finally, based on our process of the R&D Project-Priority Ordering we formulate policy implications for managing the defense technology.

• Journal of Energy Engineering
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.359-369
• /
• 2002

Nuclear power plant is a huge system with multidisciplinary technology. So, R & D prioritization is a not a simple task and the relative importance of each prioritization criterion is not well established. This study built a technology classification chart for nuclear power plant operation and maintenace, established the relative importance of prioritization criteria and assigned the relative importance of each technology at each level. Analytical Hierarchy Process was used for the prioritization and the result was validated with Consistency Index and outcomes of fields interview.

• KOREAN JOURNAL OF CROP SCIENCE
• /
• v.49 no.6
• /
• pp.546-551
• /
• 2004

The study was focused on setting priority for future core technologies in crops using Analytic Hierarchy Process (ARP). The technologies were derived by Delphi method. Evaluation criteria for the priority setting were decided as 'technology', 'market oriented', and 'public concerns' by council. The future core technologies were divided as four groups by importance and R&D level. Technologies in upper two groups were considered in the study. Group I had high importance and high R&D level. Group II had high importance and lower R&D level. Questionnaires were given to 8 specialists in crops. As the results, 'public concerns' was decided as the most important evaluation criterion. The most important technologies are 'developing of growing technology that has low inputs and production cost for environmental friendly agriculture' in group I, and 'developing of gene searching, characteristics transformation, and commercialization technologies for crops using bio-technology' in group II.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.201-218
• /
• 1999

The article contains an introduction of possibility of applying Multi-Attribute Utility Theory(MAUT) for priority setting of R&D projects. MAUT is compared with AHP, which is widely used recently. These two techuiques are applied to set priorities of R&D projects In a Government-funded Research Institute. Six criteria are chosen from consultation with decision makers. They are composed of 1) validity as representative projects, 2) possibility of resource mobilization, 3) spillover effect of developed technologies, 4) possibility of success, 5) scope of participation and 6) clarity of research goal. To set priorities of R&D projects, SMART(Simple MultiAttribute Rating Technique) and DVM(Difference Value Measurement) out of many MAUT methods are used to design the utility function and to determine the weights among criteria. The aggregation model is additive on the assumption the criteria are independent. AHP executes pairwise comparisons for criteria and alternatives. From the results of the case study, the results and theoretical characteristics are compared.