期刊文献+

安徽省自然科学基金项目资助现状、问题及对策 被引量:4

Project Funding Status,Problems and Countermeasures of Anhui Natural Science Foundation
下载PDF
导出
摘要 安徽省自然科学基金项目运行十多年来,在支持基础及应用基础研究方面,起到了"种子"基金的作用,产生了良好的效果,推动了安徽经济和社会的发展,但在运行管理过程中也存在一些亟待解决的问题。要提高安徽省自然科学基金项目资助与管理绩效,我们要从优化管理组织机构、推进管理规章制度体系建设、完善同行评议系统、重视项目全程管理、强化监督约束体系五个方面着手。 Anhui Natural Science Foundation has operated for 10 years.It has played the role of incubation fund in supporting basic and applied basic research,has produced good results,and has promoted the economic and social development of Anhui Province.However,some problems also exist in management process needed to be solved quickly.In order to raise the performance of the project funding and management,we need to optimize the management organizational structure,rules and regulations to promote the management organizational structure, rules and regulations to promote the management system, improve the peer review system, attach importance to the project throughout management, reinforce supervision and restraint system.
作者 徐溪红
出处 《合肥师范学院学报》 2009年第5期64-68,共5页 Journal of Hefei Normal University
基金 安徽省自然科学基金项目(项目编号:090416259)
关键词 安徽省自然科学基金项目 “种子”基金 问题 对策 Anhui Natural Science Foundation "incubation" funds problems countermeasure
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献21

  • 1道格拉斯·C·诺斯.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].上海:上海三联书店,1994..
  • 2Daryl E Chubin, Edward J Hackett. Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy[M], New York: State University of New York Press, 1990.
  • 3Lumann N. Selbststeuerung der Wissenschaft[J].Jahrbuch fur Sozialwissenschaft,1968, 19(2):147-170.
  • 4英国研究理事会咨询委员会(ABRC).同行评议--同行评议调查组给研究理事会咨询委员会的报告[R].国家自然科学基金委员会政策局译(内部资料),1992.
  • 5M Gibbons. Methods for the evaluation of research[J]. International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, 1985,(9):79-85.
  • 6史蒂芬·科尔.科学的制造[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2001.
  • 7S Cole, L Rubin, J R Cole. Peer Review in the National Science Foundation: Phase I of a Study[R].Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1978.
  • 8J R Cole,S Cole. Phase II of the Study[R].Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1981.
  • 9Stephen Cole, Jonathan R Cole, Gary A Simon.Chance and Consensus in Peer Review[J].Science, 1981,214(20): 881-886.
  • 10National Science Board. National Science Board and National Science Foundation Staff Task Force on Merit Review (Discussion Report)[R].NSB/MR-96-15, 1996.

共引文献72

同被引文献31

引证文献4

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部