1 / 25

Observatory of Science, Technology and Qualifications, Portugal

Observatory of Science, Technology and Qualifications, Portugal 4 th Meeting of the Scientific Council Lisbon December 4, 2012 Science policy, innovation policy and evaluation: The case of Italy Giorgio Sirilli ISSiRFA - CNR. Science and technology policy in Italy.

kermit-maddox
Télécharger la présentation

Observatory of Science, Technology and Qualifications, Portugal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Observatory of Science, Technology and Qualifications, Portugal 4th Meeting of the Scientific Council Lisbon December 4, 2012 Science policy, innovation policy and evaluation: The case of Italy Giorgio Sirilli ISSiRFA - CNR

  2. Science and technology policy in Italy • Junior minister for Research (1963) • Ministry of Universities and Research (1989) • Ministry of industry (Economic development) • Junior minister for Innovation (2000)

  3. Science and technology policy in Italy A history which starts after WW2 1950s 2010s competitiveness social needs innovation science technology

  4. Science policy in Italy • The neo-liberal approach after Reagan and Thatcher • The legitimation of R&D and education • The reduction of resources • Research evaluation • Evaluation of innovation measures and policies • How to address the crisis

  5. Italy - R&D/GDP (percentage)

  6. Age distribution of professors and researchers - 2010 Researchers Average age: 45.5 Full professors Average age: 59.2 Associate professors Average age: 53.2

  7. Average age of professors and researchers Full professors Associate professors Researchers

  8. National Research Plan 2011 - 2013 ACTIONS • Azione 1. Sostenere la creatività e l’eccellenza in tutti i campi del sapere • Azione 2. Ricerca di base orientata alle tecnologie abilitanti • Azione 3. Ricerca per lo sviluppo di settori industriali innovativi • Azione 4. Progetti integrati di Ricerca a sostegno dell’industria • Azione 5. Sostegno alla creazione di nuove imprese ad alto contenuto tecnologico • Azione 6. Sostegno alle piattaforme tecnologiche nazionali • Azione 7. Distretti ad alta tecnologia • Azione 8. Poli di eccellenza nazionale • Azione 9. Interventi finalizzati all’attrazione e qualificazione di giovani nel settore della Ricerca scientifica e tecnologica • Azione 10. Scuole internazionali di dottorato • Azione 11. Riorientamento e recupero • Azione 12. Sostegno ai post-dottorati • Azione 13. Infrastrutture • Azione 14. PON per le Regioni Convergenza • Azione 15. Estensione dei progetti PON alle altre Regioni del Mezzogiorno e al Nord • Azione 16. Migliorare il Sistema della Ricerca Italiana attraverso l’internazionalizzazione • Azione 17. Università • Azione 18. Enti di Ricerca

  9. Conference of Italian University Rectors (CRUI)Motion of October 25, 2012 The situation • The General University Fund transferred by MIUR to universities does not even allow to cover “compulsory” expenses of universities • Over the last four years the number of professors and researchers has decreased by more than 20% • Turnover limited to 20% • Constraint to turnover (first level – full professor) Request to government • Abolish the reduction of 400 million euro for 2013 • Re-establishment of turnover limitation to 40% • No constraint to turnover

  10. National Committee for the Evaluation of the University System (CSVNU) – 2011 Report • Resources available to universities have decreased since 2009 • Universities have increasingly been financed by students, enterprises, institutions (an increase of 50% between 2001 and 2009) • Financing from MIUR has dropped from 73% of the total budget in 2001 to 63% in 2009 • Investment has decreased • Student fees in the North-West universities (1,307 euro) is twice as much as universities in the South (637 euro)

  11. Established in 2011 • A government agency • The relationship with MIUR (Ministry of education, universities and research) • ANVUR activities: • Evaluation of the Quality of Research (EQR) • Habilitation of university professors and researchers (HUP) • The cost of evaluation • EQR: 300 million euro; HUP: 160 million euro

  12. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Model: Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Objective: Evaluation of Areas, Research structures and Departments (not of researchers) Reference period: 2004-2010 Start: 2011 Actors: - ANVUR (National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes) - GEV (Evaluation Groups) (#14) (450 experts involved plus referees) - Research structures (universities, research agencies, other) - Departments - Subjects evaluated: researchers (university teachers and PRA researchers)

  13. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Timing: Final report; May 2013 Impact: results expected to: - affect the financing of research structures by MIUR (Ministry of education, universities and research) through the FFO (General University Fund), - to be used by Research structures, in their own autonomy, to assign resources to their departments

  14. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Researchers’ products to be evaluated - journal articles - books and book chapters - patents - designs, exhibitions, software, manufactured items, prototypes, etc. University teachers: 3 “products” over the period 2004-2010 Public Research Agencies researchers: 6 “products” over the period 2004-2010

  15. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research GEV, university and PRA research staff, products

  16. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Methodology in the evaluation of “products”: - “direct” evaluation (bibliometric analysis, citations, impact factor) - peer-review (2 per “product”) (at least half of “products” will be evaluated through peer review) Quality parameters: relevance originality internationalisation for patents socio-economic impact

  17. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Scores: excellent (1.0) good (0.8) acceptable (0.5) limited (0.0) not amenable for evaluation (- 1) plagiary or fraud (-2) missing “product” (-0.5 each)

  18. ANVUR Evaluation of the Quality of Research Research structures provide additional information (broken down by department) on: - patents - spin-offs - incubators - consortia - archeological sites - museums - national and international mobility of researchers - funds from competitive projects (EU Framework Program, Structural Funds, MIUR funds, etc.) - funding and co-funding from general funds used for research purposes

  19. Habiltation of university professors and researchers Started 2012 A two step process: national habilitation hiring from university 60,000 candidates 70,000 applications 925 examiners 185 disciplinary panels Products sent to CINECA (November 20, 2012)

  20. Habiltation of university professors and researchers Bibliometrics NSE SSH Journals: A, B, C Median Examiners Legal actions Question marks

  21. Some issues • Reduction of resources for R&D and higher education • Equilibrium between current and capital expenditure • Equilibrium between autonomy and centralisation • Equilibrium between mission-oriented and curiosity-driven research • Ageing and reduction in number of personnel • The request from industry: from research programmes to fiscal incentives and general policies (bureaucracy, infrastructure, human resources, legality, etc.) • Evaluation exercises: too much in a short time • Research policy, innovation policy, technology policy? • What can we expect in the future?

  22. Thank you

More Related