Suchergebnisse

Public data are examined regarding policy & program implementation among US science & technology (S&T) agencies. Among state-level programs, several common aspects emerge: the goal of economic growth; reliance on research universities; technology transfer; & the existence of centers with specialization in knowledge application. S&T expenditures are analyzed & regional & local studies of S&T activities are discussed. The available data are criticized due to: overemphasis of aggregate, statewide statistics; the exclusion of universities & colleges from state rankings & program listings; & the failure to measure relationships between S&T programs, & industry, government, & academia. It is concluded that the success of S&T programs can best be measured at the institutional level. 1 Table, 29 References. S. G. Yates

The rising demand for policy-relevant impact indicators is a product of two relatively recent developments: the success of science indicators in monitoring the achievement of intrinsic (cognitive) goals of science, combined with the advent of political initiatives that seek to improve the performance of science in attaining extrinsic (social) goals of science. The search for policy relevant impact indicators, while it will continue to benefit from scholarly research in social studies of science, presupposes an appropriate accounting scheme that facilitates the organization of impact indicators. One such accounting scheme—the social knowledge system (see Holzner et al., this volume)—has demonstrated its practical utility by drawing us closer to a programmatic goal of the National Science Foundation: the establishment of a system of social impact of science (SIS) indicators (see Dunn et al., this volume) that improves our understanding of science and the way it affects the world around us.