IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/965.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kutatás és fejlesztés a közszférában
[Research and development in the public sphere]

Author

Listed:
  • Mosoniné Fried, Judit
  • Szunyogh, Zsuzsanna

Abstract

A közpénzből finanszírozott, nem egyetemekhez tartozó kutatóintézetek több nyugat- európai országban is éles viták, sőt támadások kereszttüzébe kerültek az 1990- es években. A cikkben bemutatjuk a vitákat kiváltó főbb tényezőket, valamint azokat a kormányzati lépéseket, amelyek révén jelentősen megváltozott az érintett intézetek profilja és működési módja. A nyugat-európai fejlemények tükrében megvizsgáljuk, hogy voltak-e, illetve várhatók-e a közeljövőben hasonló változások Magyarországon. A hazai kutatóintézetek helyzetét elsősorban K+F-statisztikai adatokkal jellemezzük. Ezek, valamint a 2007-ben elfogadott középtávú tudomány-, technológia- és innovációpolitikai stratégia alapján teszünk kísérletet a válaszadásra. Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) kód: H50, O30, O38.

Suggested Citation

  • Mosoniné Fried, Judit & Szunyogh, Zsuzsanna, 2008. "Kutatás és fejlesztés a közszférában [Research and development in the public sphere]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 60-79.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=965
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacqueline Senker, 2000. "Introduction to a special issue on changing organisation and structure of European public-sector research systems," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(6), pages 394-386, December.
    2. Arie Rip & Barend J R van der Meulen, 1996. "The post-modern research system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(6), pages 343-352, December.
    3. Molas-Gallart, Jordi & Tang, Puay, 2006. "Ownership matters: Intellectual Property, privatization and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 200-212, March.
    4. Bianca Potì & Emanuela Reale, 2000. "Convergence and differentiation in institutional change among European public research systems: the decreasing role of public research institutes," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(6), pages 421-431, December.
    5. Dietmar Braun, 2003. "Lasting tensions in research policy-making — a delegation problem," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(5), pages 309-321, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Types of knowledge and diversity of business-academia collaborations: Implications for measurement and policy," MPRA Paper 65908, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bianca Potì & Emanuela Reale, 2007. "Government R&D funding: new approaches in the allocation policies for public and private beneficiaries," CERIS Working Paper 200709, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    2. Yang, Hyeonchae & Jung, Woo-Sung, 2016. "Structural efficiency to manipulate public research institution networks," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 21-32.
    3. de Jong, Stefan P.L. & Wardenaar, Tjerk & Horlings, Edwin, 2016. "Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1397-1409.
    4. Chung-Souk Han, 2011. "On the demographical changes of U.S. research doctorate awardees and corresponding trends in research fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 845-865, December.
    5. Guillou, Sarah & Lazaric, Nathalie & Longhi, Christian & Rochhia, Sylvie, 2009. "The French defence industry in the knowledge management era: A historical overview and evidence from empirical data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 170-180, February.
    6. Da Teng & Jingtao Yi, 2017. "Impact of ownership types on R&D intensity and innovation performance—evidence from transitional China," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, December.
    7. Carmen Osuna & Laura Cruz Castro & Luis Sanz Menéndez, 2010. "Knocking down some Assumptions about the Effects of Evaluation Systems on Publications," Working Papers 1010, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    8. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    9. Benedetto Lepori & Emanuela Reale & Stig Slipersaeter, 2011. "The Construction of New Indicators for Science and Innovation Policies: The Case of Project Funding Indicators," Chapters, in: Massimo G. Colombo & Luca Grilli & Lucia Piscitello & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra (ed.), Science and Innovation Policy for the New Knowledge Economy, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Stanislav Zaichenko, 2018. "The human resource dimension of science-based technology transfer: lessons from Russian RTOs and innovative enterprises," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 368-388, April.
    11. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2010. "Determinants of proactive and reactive technology licensing: A contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-66, February.
    12. Laura De Dominicis & Susana Elena Pérez & Ana Fernández Zubieta, 2011. "European university funding and financial autonomy. A study on the degree of diversification of university budget and the share of competitive funding," JRC Research Reports JRC63682, Joint Research Centre, revised Mar 2011.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5019 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Sjoerd Hardeman, 2013. "Organization level research in scientometrics: a plea for an explicit pragmatic approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1175-1194, March.
    15. Laura Cruz-Castro & Luis Sanz-Menéndez & Catalina Martínez, 2012. "Research centers in transition: patterns of convergence and diversity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 18-42, February.
    16. Nam, Dae-il & Parboteeah, K. Praveen & Cullen, John B. & Johnson, Jean L., 2014. "Cross-national differences in firms undertaking innovation initiatives: An application of institutional anomie theory," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 91-106.
    17. Koen Jonkers & Thomas Zacharewicz, 2015. "Performance based funding: a comparative assessment of their use and nature in EU Member States – a working paper," JRC Research Reports JRC97684, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Van der Meulen, Barend, 1998. "Science policies as principal-agent games: Institutionalization and path dependency in the relation between government and science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 397-414, August.
    19. Lepori, Benedetto, 2011. "Coordination modes in public funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 355-367, April.
    20. Karaulova, Maria & Shackleton, Oliver & Liu, Weishu & Gök, Abdullah & Shapira, Philip, 2017. "Institutional change and innovation system transformation: A tale of two academies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 196-207.
    21. Heimeriks, Gaston & van den Besselaar, Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2008. "Digital disciplinary differences: An analysis of computer-mediated science and 'Mode 2' knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1602-1615, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:ksa:szemle:965. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    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.