Evaluation of basic research institutions: Practice and inspiration from Max Planck Society in Germany

Authors

Zhongcheng GUAN, Institute of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, ChinaFollow
Xiaolei CHEN, Institute of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Teng WANG, Institute of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Haijun ZHENG, Institute of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, ChinaFollow

Keywords

basic research, research institutions, institution evaluation, the Max Planck Society

Document Type

Policy & Management Research

Abstract

Basic research institutions are a crucial component of China’s strategic scientific and technological strength. Efficient evaluation of their development status is an important part in improving China’s basic research level and achieving sci-tech selfreliance and self-strengthening at higher levels. Therefore, this study takes the top basic research institution the Max Planck Society as an example to explore the evaluation system constructed by it for its affiliated Max Planck Institutes. Firstly, the study summarizes the evaluation content and characteristics of different evaluation stages in the specific evaluation process of the Max Planck Society. Secondly, it compares and analyzes the key evaluation contents of different periods, and explores the changes of the research institute evaluation system. Finally, based on the actual situation in China, suggestions are proposed for the evaluation practice of basic research institutions in China.

First page

1490

Last Page

1500

Language

Chinese

Publisher

Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences

References

1 黄卫. 加强我国面向世界科技强国的基础研究基本布局和若干思考. 中国软科学, 2017, (8): 1-8. Huang W. Some thoughts of strengthening the basic layout of China’s basic research towards the world’s scientific and technological powers. China Soft Science, 2017, (8): 1-8. (in Chinese)

2 李静海. 抓住机遇推进基础研究高质量发展. 中国科学院院刊, 2019, 34(5): 586-596. Li J H. Seize the opportunity to promote the high quality development of basic research. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2019, 34(5): 586-596. (in Chinese)

3 赵丽娟. 基础研究绩效评估综述. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2005, (10): 44-48. Zhao L J. A literature review of basic research performance evaluation. Science of Science and Management of S.& T., 2005, (10): 44-48. (in Chinese)

4 肖小溪, 周建中. 国立科研机构科研人员评价的模式研究. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2009, 30(4): 20-24. Xiao X X, Zhou J Z. Study on the model of researchers’ evaluation in national research institutions. Science of Science and Management of S.& T., 2009, 30(4): 20-24. (in Chinese)

5 白坤朝, 汲培文. 基础研究项目绩效评估的实践与探索——国家杰出青年科学基金项目绩效评估案例研究. 中国科学基金, 2013, 27(1): 22-25. Bai K Z, Ji P W. Evaluation and practice of basic research performance-analyzing the national science fund for distinguished young scholars (NSFC). Bulletin of National Natural Science Foundation of China, 2013, 27(1): 22-25. (in Chinese)

6 吴根, 刘耀虎. 基础研究类专项绩效评价方法探讨. 中国基础科学, 2020, 22(6): 55-60. Wu G, Liu Y H. Discussion on performance evaluation methods of basic research special projects. China Basic Science, 2020, 22(6): 55-60. (in Chinese)

7 安宝晟, 关忠诚, 高星. 国立科技单元的科研评价探讨. 科研管理, 2007, (S1): 84-89. An B S, Guan Z C, Gao X. Scientific research evaluation of national S&T units. Science Research Management, 2007, (S1): 84-89. (in Chinese)

8 周建中, 徐芳. 国立科研机构同行评议方法的模式比较研究. 科学学研究, 2013, 31(11): 1642-1648. Zhou J Z, Xu F. A comparison study on peer review method in national research institution evaluations. Studies in Science of Science, 2013, 31(11): 1642-1648. (in Chinese)

9 张义芳. 美、英、德、日国立科研机构绩效评估制度探析. 科技管理研究, 2018, 38(22): 25-30. Zhang Y F. Performance evaluation of national scientific research institutions: The experiences from the USA, the UK, Germany and Japan. Science and Technology Management Research, 2018, 38(22): 25-30. (in Chinese)

10 刘慧慧, 张树良. 面向开放创新的基础研究评估新模式研究. 科学学研究, 2022, 40(8): 1495-1504. Liu H H, Zhang S L. Evaluation of knowledge innovation effect: A new model of basic research evaluation oriented to open innovation. Studies in Science of Science, 2022, 40(8): 1495-1504. (in Chinese)

11 朱崇开. 德国基础科学研究的中坚力量——马普学会. 学会, 2010, (3): 56-62. Zhu C K. The backbone of basic scientific research in Germany—Max Planck Institute. XUEHUI, 2010, 56(3): 56-62. (in Chinese)

12 廖方宇, 邓心安. 马普学会研究所评价对我国研究所评价工作的启示. 科技导报, 2003, (9): 22-25. Liao F Y, Deng X A. The Enlightenment of the evaluation of research institutes of the Ma Pu Society on the evaluation of research institutes in China. Science & Technology Review, 2003, (9): 22-25. (in Chinese)

13 李晓轩. 德国科研机构的评价实践与启示. 中国科学院院刊, 2004, (4): 274-277. Li X X. Practice and enlightenment of the evaluation of scientific research institutions in Germany. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2004, (4): 274-277. (in Chinese)

14 林豆豆, 田大山. MPG科研管理模式对创新我国基础研究机构的启示. 自然辩证法通讯, 2006, (4): 53-60. Lin D D, Tian D S. Scientific research managing pattern of the max planck society and its enlightenment to China. Journal of Dialectics of Nature, 2006, (4): 53-60. (in Chinese)

15 Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science. Evaluation the Procedures of the Max Planck Society (2019). Munich: Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, 2019 .

16 Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science. Rules for Scientific Advisory Boards and Guidelines for Evaluation. Munich: Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, 2015.

17 Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science. Evaluation the Procedures of the Max Planck Society (2015). Munich: Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, 2015.

18 白春礼, 潘教峰, 李晓轩. 世界主要国立科研机构概况. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013. Bai C L, Pan J F, Li X X. A Profile of the World’s Major National Scientific Research Institutions. Beijing: Science Press, 2013. (in Chinese)

19 杨卫, 郑永和, 董超. 如何评审具有颠覆性创新的基础研究. 中国科学基金, 2017, 31(4): 313-315. Yang W, Zheng Y H, Dong C. How to review basic research with a disruptive innovation nature. Bulletin of National Natural Science Foundation of China, 2017, 31(4): 313-315. (in Chinese)

20 李晓轩, 肖小溪, 娄智勇, 等. 战略性基础研究：认识与对策. 中国科学院院刊, 2022, 37(3): 269-277.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ Li X X, Xiao X X, Lou Z Y, et al. Strategic basic research: Cognition and suggestions. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2022, 37(3): 269-277.‬‬‬(in Chinese)

21 Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science. Annual Report 2022. Munich: Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, 2022.

22 孙悦, 赵彬彬, 蔺洁. 支撑前沿突破基础研究的科学基金全过程管理体系初探. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2021, 42(4): 70-82. Sun Y, Zhao B B, Lin J. A preliminary study on the whole process management system of science funds for frontier breakthrough basic research. Science of Science and Management of S.& T., 2021, 42(4): 70-82. (in Chinese)

23 Krull W. The Max Planck experience of evaluation. Scientometrics, 1995, 34(3), 441-450.

24 MeiersRalph. Evaluation Procedures in the Max Planck Society. (2015-03-24)[2023-04-13]. https://www.nas.gov.ua/text/pdfNews/Max%20Planck%20Society_Evaluation%20NASU.pdf.

25 吴善超. 科研环境对基础研究绩效的影响机制研究. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2015. Wu S C. Study on the Mechanism of Research Environment Affecting the Performance of Basic Research. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2015. (in Chinese)

Recommended Citation

GUAN, Zhongcheng; CHEN, Xiaolei; WANG, Teng; and ZHENG, Haijun (2023) "Evaluation of basic research institutions: Practice and inspiration from Max Planck Society in Germany," Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Chinese Version): Vol. 38 : Iss. 10 , Article 8.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20230414001
Available at: https://bulletinofcas.researchcommons.org/journal/vol38/iss10/8