徐芳,李晓轩*.科技评价新旧模式转型改革的逻辑与路径研究[J].中国科学院院刊,2026,41(6):1237-1246.

科技评价新旧模式转型改革的逻辑与路径研究

Logic and path of transformation reform between old and new research evaluation models

徐芳
1 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院 北京 100190;
2 中国科学院大学 公共政策与管理学院 北京 100049
XU Fang
1 Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China;
2 School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
李晓轩*
1 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院 北京 100190;
2 中国科学院大学 公共政策与管理学院 北京 100049
LI Xiaoxuan*
1 Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China;
2 School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

         科技评价;“破四唯”;新旧模式;转型改革

        research evaluation;breaking the four-only criteria;old and new models;transformation reform

        国家“十五五”规划再次强调破除“四唯”，为什么“破四唯”如此难？文章认为要回答这一问题，需要深入分析科技评价旧模式 （标签式管理评价模式） 与新模式 （内涵式质量评价模式） 的底层逻辑关系。研究认为，标签式管理评价模式是特定历史条件下的选择，发挥了积极的历史作用；在向内涵式质量评价模式转型过程中，论文等指标问题解决相对较好，但国家科技奖励、“人才帽子”两项标签式指标具有较强惯性，成为“破四唯”的难点所在。文章提出这些难点问题的解决，需要在科研管理向现代科研治理转变的框架之下系统谋划，并提出了新旧模式转型改革的4条路径。

        The national 15th Five-Year Plan once again emphasizes breaking the four-only criteria. Why is it so difficult to dismantle the four-only criteria? This study argues that an in-depth analysis of the underlying logical relationship between the old label-based evaluation model and the new connotation-oriented quality evaluation model is required to address this question. The study finds that the label-based evaluation model is a rational choice under specific historical circumstances and it has delivered positive effects. During the transition toward connotation-oriented quality evaluation, problems concerning indicators such as academic papers have been well resolved. Nevertheless, national science and technology awards and talent titles retain strong institutional inertia, standing as major obstacles to breaking the four-only criteria. This study proposes that these difficulties demand systematic planning amid the shift from traditional research administration to modern research governance, and puts forward four paths for the transformation reform of evaluation models.