sofs.org.ua › About us › Archive › 2023 › №4(122) › 1.5

1.5

UPDATING THE EVALUATION OF RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

O.V. NESTERENKO 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5329-889X
V.B. POLISCHUK 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6991-0617
S.S. ZHARINOV 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3568-8127
1 International European University, Kyiv, Ukraine
2 Ukrainian Scientific Center for the Development of Information Technologies, Kyiv, Ukraine

Nauka naukozn. 2023, 4(122): 78—96
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2023.04.078

Section: Problems of the development of science and technology potential
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The necessity of updating the set of criteria for evaluating institutions engaged in R&D for eligibility for governmental support is justified. Emphasis is placed on the importance of applying external criteria in the current conditions, taking into account their compliance with the strategic goals of the state. Its component should include a thematic orientation of the organization’s R&D on security and defense purposes, specifically the implementation of the objectives of the National Security Strategy of Ukraine, enhancing national resilience, developing the defense-industrial complex, etc. For the application of internal criteria in determining priorities in applied and experimental research, expert assessments should rely on objective data reflecting the performance of a research subject. A relevant set of criteria can be the sustainable development concept, which will ensure the formulation of external criteria for setting up science and technology priorities and specification of R&D areas, programs and projects. The problem arising as a consequence of the existing practice of incomplete innovation process «Science — Technology — Production» is highlighted. It is emphasized that such an approach does not guarantee the creation of a product or process innovation, and its practical implementation. The necessity for regular updating of the methodological support for the State Register of Research Institutions Eligible for Governmental Support a tool for the national policy on R&D is justified. The essence and significance of combining quantitative (scoring) and expert methods for evaluating the activities of research institutions are characterized. It is noted that diverse forms and tools of information technology, including analytical methods and mathematical modeling, should become powerful agents of transformation in the assessment processes. To support expert review of indicators and assessment criteria, an integrative methodology is proposed, based on the utilization of several well-established methods: voting, analytic hierarchy process, analytical networks, combined with ontological data models and the application of graphs for visualizing alternative assessment processes. An illustrative example is given, to show that the existing complexity of evaluating as a multiple-criteria task can be successfully overcome by utilizing a relatively simple yet scientifically sound methodology and appropriate software tools. It is emphasized that the application of a combined evaluation process (qualitative and quantitative) will help enhance the soundness of decision-making.

Keywords: research institutions, research and development, science and technology sector, State Register of Research Institutions Eligible for Governmental Support, strategic goals of the state, national security and defense.

References

  1. Shovkun, T.V., & et al. (2009). Effectiveness of scientific activity: state, trends and evaluation problems. Kyiv: UkrINTEI [in Ukrainian].
  2. Odotiuk, I. (2012). Evaluation of results of scientific activity in Ukraine: regulatory and legal aspect. The Problems of Innovation and Investment Driven Development, 3, 38—42 [in Ukrainian].
  3. Zhuk, L.V. (2019). R&D activity systems in higher education institutions of Ukraine: formation, evaluation, management. Lviv: Lviv Politekhnika Publishing [in Ukrainian].
  4. Yehorov, I.Yu., & Zhukovych, I.A. (2022). Performance Evaluation in Research Organizations: Evolution of Methodologies. Science and Science of Science, 3 (117), 36—50. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2022.03.036 [in Ukrainian].
  5. Kubalskyi, O.N. (2023). The phenomenon of science in the system of transformations of modern life. Science and Science of Science, 1 (119), 35—46. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2023.01.035 [in Ukrainian].
  6. Kyiak, B.R. (1998). Prediction of the field of scientific research and priorities of the State Fund for Fundamental Research. Problems of Science, 4, 16—19 [in Ukrainian].
  7. Onopryenko, V.Y., & Ryzhko, L.V. (1994). Expert activities as a cultural phenomenon Science and Science of Science, 1—2 (4), 150—156 [in Russian].
  8. Bykov, V., Spirin, O., Biloshchytskyi, A., & et al. (2020). Open digital systems in evaluating the results of scientific and pedagogical research. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 75, 294—315. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v75i1.3589 [in Ukrainian].
  9. Yatsyshyn, A.V., Mozolevych, H.Ya., Yatsyshyn, T.M., & Sukhykh, A.S. (2023). The role of electronic infrastructure in providing scientific activity: challenges and prospects. Science, Technologies, Innovations, 2 (26), 64—77. https://doi.org/10.35668/2520-6524-2023-2-08 [in Ukrainian].
  10. Hobday, A.J., Boschetti, F., Moeseneder, C., & et al. (2020). Quantitative foresighting as a means of improving anticipatory scientific capacity and strategic planning. One Earth, 3 (5), 631—644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.10.015
  11. Wang, J.Q., & Cao, H.J. (2022). Improving competitive strategic decisions of Chinese coal companies toward green transformation: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model. Resources policy, 75, 102483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102483
  12. International Council for Science (ICSU) et al. (2019). Analysis of sustainable development — global and regional contexts (1—2), 2. Ukraine in sustainable development indicators. Kyiv: National Technical University of Ukraine «Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute» [in Ukrainian].
  13. Polischuk, V.B., Netesin, I.Ye., Nesterenko, O.V., & et al. (2021). Information technologies in the management of defense resources: methodological context and examples of practical implementation (1–2), 2. Kyiv: Ukrainian Scientific Center for the Development of Information Technologies [in Ukrainian].
  14. Nesterenko, O., Netesin, I., Polischuk V., & Y. Selin (2021). Multifunctional Methodology of Expert Evaluation Alternatives in Tasks of Different Information Complexity. Proceedings from: IEEE 3rd International Conference on Advanced Trends in Information Theory (ATIT), 226—231. https://doi.org/10.1109/ATIT54053.2021.9678742
  15. Nesterenko, O., Netesin, I., Polischuk, V., & Trofymchuk, O. (2020). Development of a procedure for expert estimation of capabilities in defense planning under multicriterial conditions. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4/2 (106), 33—43. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2020.208603

Full Text (PDF)