bibliosferaБиблиосфераBibliosphere1815-31862712-7931ГПНТБ СО РАН10.20913/1815-3186-2019-3-85-92bibliosfera-26Research ArticleНАУКА В ЦИФРАХSCIENCE IN FIGURESНовая модель рейтингового финансирования научных организаций АрменииClassification model of funding for research institutions in ArmeniaСаргсянШ. А.SargsyanSh. A.

Саргсян Шушаник Артуровна – кандидат биологических наук, руководитель Центра анализа и мониторинга научной информации Института проблем информатики и автоматизации Республики Армении, преподаватель кафедры медицинской физики Ереванского государственного медицинского университета имени М. Гераци

Ереван

Center for Scientific Information Analysis and Monitoring at the Institute for Informatics and Automation Problems; Medical Physics Department at YSMU 

Yerevan

shushaniksargsyan8@gmail.comАрутюнянТ. С.HarutyunyanT. S.

Арутюнян Тигран Самвелович – кандидат биологических наук, руководитель Центра региональных исследований 

Ереван

Center for Regional Studies

Yerevan

 

tigharout@gmail.comСаакянВ. А.SahakyanV. H.

Саакян Вардан Айастанович – кандидат физико-математических наук, заместитель председателя

Ереван

sahakian@scs.amАрутюнянС. С.HaroutiunianS. G.

Арутюнян Самвел Гарникович – доктор физико-математических наук, профессор, председатель 

Ереван

sharout@ysu.amИнститут проблем информатики и автоматизации Национальной академии наук Республики Армении; Ереванский государственный медицинский университет имени М. ГерациАрменияInstitute for Informatics and Automation Problems National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia; Medical Physics Department at the Yerevan State Medical University after M. HeratsiArmeniaАкадемия государственного управления Республики АрменииАрменияPublic Administration Academy of the Republic of ArmeniaArmeniaКомитет по науке Республики АрменииАрменияCommittee of Science of the Republic of ArmeniaArmenia201930092019038592Copyright © Саргсян Ш.А., Арутюнян Т.С., Саакян В.А., Арутюнян С.С., 20192019Саргсян Ш.А., Арутюнян Т.С., Саакян В.А., Арутюнян С.С.Sargsyan S.A., Harutyunyan T.S., Sahakyan V.H., Haroutiunian S.G.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.bibliosphere.ru/jour/article/view/26

Повышение эффективности использования государственных средств, направленных на научно-технические исследования и разработки, является актуальной проблемой. Один из путей решения этой проблемы – финансирование научных организаций сообразно их результативности. Для этого в ряде стран практикуется оценка эффективности деятельности научных организаций на общенациональном уровне. Оценка эффективности деятельности организаций, занимающихся научно-техническими исследованиями и разработками, и распределение финансирования сообразно результатам этой оценки есть в Великобритании (первой стране, внедрившей такую практику), Италии и России. В Армении модель рейтингового финансирования государственных научных организаций планируется внедрить с 2020 г.

В статье представлена модель рейтингового финансирования государственных научных организаций Армении, разработанная и предложенная Комитетом по науке Республики Армении. Внедрение модели приведет к образованию дополнительных финансовых ресурсов и повышению эффективности бюджетного финансирования, так как оно будет производиться с учетом результатов научной организации.

Improving the efficiency of the use of public funds directed at scientific and technological research and development is one of the urgent problems of our time. Among the possible solutions is scientific organizations funding according to their results. With this aim, a number of countries have implemented evaluation of their scientific organizations productivity at the national level. Evaluation of the effectiveness of organizations engaged in scientific and technical R&D, and the distribution of funding according to the results of such evaluation there are in the UK (the first country to introduce such practices), Italy and Russia. Starting from 2020, the Republic of Armenia is also planning to invest a rating model for financing state scientific organizations.

The article presents the model of rating financing of the state scientific organizations in Armenia, developed and proposed by the Committee on science of the Republic of Armenia. The introduction of the model will lead to the formation of additional financial resources and increase the efficiency of budget financing, as it will be done with the account of results of a scientific organization.

коэффициент оценки эффективностирейтинговое финансированиенаукометрическая оценкаэкспертная оценкагосударственное финансированиебазовое финансированиеefficiency/productivity ratiorating model for financingscientometric assessmentexpert assessmentpublic fundingbasic financingReferencesГуськов А. Е., Косяков Д. В., Селиванова И. В. Методика оценки результативности научных организаций // Вестник Российской академии наук. 2018. Т. 88, № 5. С. 430–443. DOI: 10.7868/S0869587318050092.Guskov A. E., Kosyakov D. V., Selivanova I. V. Method to assess the efficiency of scientific organizations. Vestnik Rossiskoi academii nauk, 2018, 88(5), 430–443. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.7868/S0869587318050092.Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Pugini F. The measurement of Italian universities’ research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology. Scientometrics, 2008, 76(2), 225–244. DOI: 10.1007/s11192007-1942-2.Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Pugini F. The measurement of Italian universities’ research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology. Scientometrics, 2008, 76(2), 225–244. DOI: 10.1007/s11192007-1942-2.Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A. Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 2011, 87(3), 499–514. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0352-7.Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A. Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 2011, 87(3), 499–514. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0352-7.Aksnes D. W. When different persons have an identical author name. How frequent are homonyms? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008, 59(5), 838–841. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20788.Aksnes D. W. When different persons have an identical author name. How frequent are homonyms? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008, 59(5), 838–841. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20788.Aksnes D. W., Taxt R. E. Peers reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at Norvegian University. Research Evaluation, 2004, 13(1), 33–41. DOI: 10.3152/147154404781776563.Aksnes D. W., Taxt R. E. Peers reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at Norvegian University. Research Evaluation, 2004, 13(1), 33–41. DOI: 10.3152/147154404781776563.Anfossi A., Ciolfi A., Costa F., Parisi G., Benedetto S. Large-scale assessment of research outputs through a weighted combination of bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 2016, 107(2), 671–683. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-1882-9.Anfossi A., Ciolfi A., Costa F., Parisi G., Benedetto S. Large-scale assessment of research outputs through a weighted combination of bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 2016, 107(2), 671–683. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-1882-9.Malek J., Hudeckova V., Matejka M. System of evaluation of research institutions in the Czech Republic. Procedia Computer Science, 2014, 33, 315–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.06.050.Malek J., Hudeckova V., Matejka M. System of evaluation of research institutions in the Czech Republic. Procedia Computer Science, 2014, 33, 315–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.06.050.Bence V., Oppenheim C. The evolution of the UK’s research assessment exercise: publications, performance and perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 2005, 37(2), 137–155. DOI: 10.1080/00220620500211189.Bence V., Oppenheim C. The evolution of the UK’s research assessment exercise: publications, performance and perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 2005, 37(2), 137–155. DOI: 10.1080/00220620500211189.Butler L., McAllister I. Metrics or peer review? Evaluating the 2001 UK research assessment exercise in political science. Political Studies Review, 2007, 7(1), 3–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2008.00167.x. 91Butler L., McAllister I. Metrics or peer review? Evaluating the 2001 UK research assessment exercise in political science. Political Studies Review, 2007, 7(1), 3–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2008.00167.x. 91Franceschini F., Maisano D. Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR2011– 2014. Journal of Informetrics, 2017, 11(2), 337–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.02.005.Franceschini F., Maisano D. Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR2011– 2014. Journal of Informetrics, 2017, 11(2), 337–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.02.005.Fursov K., Roschina Y., Balmush O. Determinants of research productivity: an individual-level lens. Foresight and STI Governance, 2016, 10(2), 44–56. DOI: 10.17323/1995-459X.2016.2.44.56.Fursov K., Roschina Y., Balmush O. Determinants of research productivity: an individual-level lens. Foresight and STI Governance, 2016, 10(2), 44–56. DOI: 10.17323/1995-459X.2016.2.44.56.Harman G. Allocating research infrastructure grants in post-binary higher education systems: British and Australian approaches. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 2000, 22(2), 111–126. DOI: 10.1080/14636770307132.Harman G. Allocating research infrastructure grants in post-binary higher education systems: British and Australian approaches. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 2000, 22(2), 111–126. DOI: 10.1080/14636770307132.Hicks D. Performance-based university research funding system. Research Policy, 2012, 41. 251–261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007.Hicks D. Performance-based university research funding system. Research Policy, 2012, 41. 251–261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007.Lee F. S., Pham X., Gu G. The UK research assessment exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2013, 37(4), 693–717. DOI: 10.1093/cje/bet031.Lee F. S., Pham X., Gu G. The UK research assessment exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2013, 37(4), 693–717. DOI: 10.1093/cje/bet031.Moed H. F. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht, Springer, 2005. 323 p.Moed H. F. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht, Springer, 2005. 323 p.Oppenheim C. The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology. Journal of Documentation, 1997, 53(5), 477–487.Oppenheim C. The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology. Journal of Documentation, 1997, 53(5), 477–487.Oppenheim C., Norris M. Citation counts and the research assessment exercise V: archaeology and the 2001 RAE. Journal of Documentation, 2003, 56(6), 709–730. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410310698734.Oppenheim C., Norris M. Citation counts and the research assessment exercise V: archaeology and the 2001 RAE. Journal of Documentation, 2003, 56(6), 709–730. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410310698734.Seidl da Fonseca R., Pinheiro-Veloso A. The practice and future of financing science, technology, and innovation. Foresight and STI Governance, 2018, 12(2), 6–22. DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2018.2.6.22.Seidl da Fonseca R., Pinheiro-Veloso A. The practice and future of financing science, technology, and innovation. Foresight and STI Governance, 2018, 12(2), 6–22. DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2018.2.6.22.Zacharewicz Th., Lepori B., Reale E., Jonkers K. Performance-based research funding in EU member states – a comparative assessment. Science and Public Policy, 2019, 46(1), 105–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy041.Zacharewicz Th., Lepori B., Reale E., Jonkers K. Performance-based research funding in EU member states – a comparative assessment. Science and Public Policy, 2019, 46(1), 105–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy041.Wa-Mbaleka S., Aguila Gomez M. State funding of research in the Philippines: processes and stakeholders’ experiences. Prism, 2018, 22(1), 2–19.Wa-Mbaleka S., Aguila Gomez M. State funding of research in the Philippines: processes and stakeholders’ experiences. Prism, 2018, 22(1), 2–19.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.