Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 7, Issue 3–6, pp 165–176 | Cite as

Applied scientometrics: An assessment methodology for developing countries

  • M. J. Moravcsik
Article

Abstract

A United Nations sponsored project is described to formulate a practicable method for assessing the impact of science and technology in the developing countries and to propose further research to improve the development of such indicators. After a discussion of the importance of the project, the aims of science and technology are summarized, followed by the elements that need to be considered in such an assessment procedure, and the structure of the relationships among these elements. The first step in the assessment process is to make a map of the part of the system to be assessed. The types of indicators that can be used are then listed, and it is suggested that the status of these indicators is weak, especially with respect to their applicability to developing countries. It is proposed that a small number of specific pilot projects be undertaken to test the general ideas contained in the discussion and to experiment with novel kinds of indicators.

Keywords

General Idea Practicable Method Pilot Project Assessment Process Assessment Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    “An Assessment Scheme for Science and Technology for Comprehensive Development”, Working Paper GRAZ/P. 3 for the Panel on Indicators of Measurement of Impact of Science and Technology on Socio-economic Development Objectives, Graz, Austria, May 2–7, 1984. Copies available from the Centre for Science and Technology for Development, Room 1040, 1 UN Plaza, New York 10017, USA.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. J. LOTKA,Journal of the Washington Academy of Science 16 (1926) No. 12, 317.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. deS. PRICE, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 27, 292 (176)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See e.g., P. G. BLASCO, La produccion cientifica espanola de1965 a 1970. Un estudio comparado,Revista Mexicana de Sociologia 37 (1975) No. 1; W. O. AIYEPEKU, The productivity of geographical authors — A case study from Nigeria,Journal of Documentation 32 (1976) No. 2 105.; T. SAREVIC, Evaluation and potential use of the data bank at the Brazilian Institute of Bibliography and Documentation IBBD, UNESCO report 3055/RMO. RD/DBA, Paris, 1974.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. J. MORAVCSIK,How to Grow Science, Universe Books, New York 1980, Chapter 11.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. J. MORAVCSIK,Scientometrics, 6 (1984) 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. J. MORAVCSIK,Research Policy, 2 (1973) 256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. R. MARTIN, J. IRVINE, Assessing Basic Research: Some Partial Indicators of Scientific Progress, Research Policy (in press)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    See, for example,Science Indicators 1982. National Science Foundation, Washington, 1983, pp. 143–162.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. J. Moravcsik
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Theoretical ScienceUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations