IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v5y1995i1p23-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns of science and technology policy evaluation in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Kuhlmann

Abstract

In Germany the practice of the evaluation of research and of research institutions is characterised by a considerable degree of self-organisation of the scientific communities. A report is given of a recent comprehensive analysis of evaluation practice in S&T programmes: it critically analysed over 50 evaluation studies which the Federal Ministry for Research and Technology had commissioned since 1985. On the basis of this analysis and its recommendations, a rough outline for a systematised future evaluation practice was proposed and will soon be put in practice. Recent attempts to combine strategically oriented evaluations of project funding with those of institutional funding of S&T organisations are reported In this context, several studies of future developments of science and technology (‘technology foresight’) were recently carried out, raising some public interest. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Kuhlmann, 1995. "Patterns of science and technology policy evaluation in Germany," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 23-33, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:5:y:1995:i:1:p:23-33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rev/5.1.23
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:5:y:1995:i:1:p:23-33. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.