Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

G.M.DOBROV AND SCIENCE OF SCIENCE LEGACY

100%
Kavunenko L., Goncharova T.
Nauka ta naukoznavstvo (Science and Science of Science)
|
2009
|
issue 1
9-23
EN
The article contains two parts. The first part is devoted to the history of the national science of science, and it shows that although science of science studies were launched in the USSR as early as in 20s, they were repressed in 30-40s and reborn only at the beginning of 60s. In the post-Soviet period, science of science studies had to focus on transformation problems, along with rethinking the already existing information about science. The second part aims to show the importance of Dobrov's ideas for today, especially of concepts published in his book 'Science about Science'. They provide for the basic methodological principle of science of science, that the way to understand problems of national scientific system leads through their critical historical analysis. The significance of this principle for the post-Soviet science of science is shown, especially for purposes of sound diagnostics (investigation of initial reasons) rather than for mere pointing out to symptoms (mainly visible ones) of crisis-related phenomena in science. It is proved on the basis of Dobrov's book 'Science about Science' and other literary sources that the post-Soviet science did not live up to the above principle and, as a result, researchers fell into methodological 'traps', especially in choosing criteria/level of 'healthy condition of science', namely, the scopes of resource supply (money and personnel) to the Soviet science. Also, it is shown that answers to burning problems faced by post-Soviet science, especially ones concerned with research personnel, can be found in Dobrov's 'Science about Science'. Therefore, revision and rethinking of his works is truly in need today.
2

IMPORTANT ISSUES OF THE INNOVATION-DRIVEN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (REVIEW OF THE NEW INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 'TECHNOLOGICAL LEARNING, INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT')

100%
Kavunenko L., Goncharova T.
Nauka ta naukoznavstvo (Science and Science of Science)
|
2008
|
issue 3
3-19
EN
A review of four articles from the 1st issue of the international journal 'Technological Learning, Innovation and Development' (Nelson, Richard R. The changing institutional requirements for technological and economic catch up; Fagerberg Jan, Verspagen Bart. Innovation, growth and economic development: have the conditions for catch-up changed?; Mathews, John. Latecomer strategies for catching-up: the cases of renewable energies and the LED programme; Cantwell John, Piscitello Lucia. Attraction and deterrence in the location of foreign-owned R&D activities: the role of positive and negative spillovers) addresses issues devoted to science & technology capacities and policies, mostly in the context of technological catch up: factors allowing some countries to catch up with technological leaders, while others remain outsiders; factors enhancing economic growth; effective policies for successful catch up; the role of technological learning, government support and intellectual property in catching up; requirements to innovation strategies for catching up: support to science & technology education, availability of national technological capacities in industry, and intra-firm R&D, adequate role of the government segment of the national R&D; specifics of catch up policies pursued by countries that happened to be latecomers in various epochs; cluster analysis as a tool to study the role of innovation capacities for economic growth; specifics of location and activities of foreign-owned R&D units.
3

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS IN POST-SOCIALIST COUNTRIES: ANALYIS OF TRANSFORMATION ASPECTS

100%
Kavunenko L., Goncharova T.
Nauka ta naukoznavstvo (Science and Science of Science)
|
2008
|
issue 1
41-57
EN
It's shown that the transformation process is put by national experts in a quite similar chronological frame, mostly as 1989/90-1992; 1992-1994/95; 1995-1998/99; 1999, in view of the contents and coverage of the national science & technology policy. However, approaches to the transformation system varied depending on (i) specifics of national S&T systems during the socialist period, (ii) the approach to the transformation process, focusing either on following the Western model or on a series of measures meant to 'preserve' the institutional build-up of the S&T inherited from the past. But in spite of these distinctions, the transformation process in post-socialist countries of CEE ended up by adopting the conceptual documents harmonized with ones existing at the EU level. However, as the analysis shows, in early 2000s the national S&T system in its narrow sense, that is, R&D / innovation performers, nevertheless remained at the first phase of the transformation process, in the condition of isolation/fragmentation, in a major part of the CEE countries. Therefore, national science & technology systems could be conceptualized by early 2000s, but, for the most part of post-socialist countries, failed to be realized. The problems of fragmentation can be better understood through (i) evaluation of the institutional change within the national science & technology system, which reveals the most difficult segment in the transformation process, 'branch' science; (ii) analysis of supply and demand concepts in the context of national S&T systems.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.