论我国技术创新政策制度的优化

我国的技术创新政策日显重要,正在发挥积极的作用,同时也有待于进一步健全。目前还存在着许多问题,集中体现在政策的制定、政策的执行、政策的评估等几个主要的方面,并各具有不同的表现形式。对此,提出相应的对策性建议,主要有技术创新政策制定机制的优化、技术创新政策执行机制的完善、技术创新政策评估机制的建立等三个方面。     

论技术创新的法律与政策保障

我国有关技术创新的法律与政策保障的内容,不仅体现在知识产权的法律制度中,而且存在于现行法律体系内的经济法、行政法、贸易法、金融法等部门法律及相应的政策中。其作用与功能主要反映为技术创新的主体关系、决策与评估机制、财政补贴、技术转移机制、技术资金来源、知识产权法律保护、政府介入措施等方面。为了解决我国技术创新中存在的问题与障碍,应充分适用现行法律保障制度和有利于技术创新的政策环境。     

我国本科生导师制的政策支持机制研究

本科生导师制是我国部分高校在本科教育机制上的积极探索和重要创新。目前,本科生导师制的推行虽然在一定程度上促进了教育观念的变革和教育质量的提高,但是我国的本科生导师制在运行中遇到了各种阻碍和难题,有关于本科生导师制的政策支持机制研究就属于其中的重要课题之一。     

企业是技术创新的主体

在技术创新主体问题上,我国存在把高校以及独立的研究机构或"官"产学研等作为技术创新主体的认识误区,漠视了企业的主体地位。应当准确定位企业是技术创新的主体。使我国企业真正成为技术创新主体,必须强化企业对自身主体地位的意识,强化政府在企业技术创新领域的公共管理职能,高校、独立研究机构要积极寻求与企业联姻。     

深圳安防协会帮助安防企业掌握政策支持途径

【本刊讯】为了帮助深圳安防企业了解深圳市政府针对中小企业设立的种类繁多的优惠政策和专项资金,有针对性的根据本企业的实际情况申请政府的政策和资金支持,缓解金融危机给企业带来的压力,2月27日,深圳市安全防范行业协会召开了2009年科技政策解读会,邀请具有多年政府资金申请辅导经     

强化企业专利工作加速企业技术创新

随着我国改革开放的不断深化,社会主义市场经济逐步建立和完善,转换企业经营机制,把企业推向市场,已成为我国经济体制改革的中心环节和首要任务。国有企业是国民经济发展的基础也是我国社会主义市场经济的主体。搞好国有大中型企业的转轨建制,放宽企业经营自主权,增强企业竞争力是建立现代企业制度的需要,同时也是我国经济增长方式转变的需要。 要搞好国有大中型企业,使国有企业扭亏为盈,必须切实抓好两个方面的工作:一是加快以建立现代企业制度为目标的企业改革步伐,二是加大以提高经济效益为中心的企业技术进步力度。 企业改革的重点是制…     

企业技术创新与专利战略

技术创新是企业发展的直接动力,是企业参与竞争的筹码。然而,当我们面对众多高新技术领域的专利申请状况,面对国内外企业法人在专利战略及其认识上存在的惊人差距时,不能不思考这样两个非常严肃的问题: 其一,市场竞争不仅表现为技术竞争,而且这种竞争越来越来现为知识产权的竞争。我们的许多全业对此尚无清醒的认识。我国专利局受理的专利申请统计表明,在微电子、通信等众多高新技术领域,70%以上的发明专利申请是外国公司的。这就意味着,今后10年到20年,这些相应技术领域的中国市场将被外国大公司所垄断,而且这种垄断是合法有效的。假如我们…     

企业所得税法对技术创新企业的税收优惠

本文指出新企业所得税法及其实施条例的正式实行,为技术创新企业制定了低税率、税前加计扣除、加速固定资产折旧等税收优惠政策,必将极大地促进企业的自主创新能力,提高我国产品在国际上的竞争能力,为把我国建设成为自主创新型国家也将会起到非常重要的作用。     

企业技术创新中专利战略的实施

技术创新是经济增长的发动机,是企业发展的不竭动力.企业技术创新与专利工作有着密不可分的关系,专利不仅是企业保护自身技术创新的重要手段,更是企业形成持续创新能力、占领市场竞争制高点的有力武器.实施专利战略,是企业经营战略中一个不可缺少的组成部分,它对我国企业参与国际竞争具有十分重要的意义.     

知识产权私权性质的变化及其与技术创新政策的协调机制探析

从知识经济时代知识产权传统私权性质的变化以及知识产权法律公法属性增强的现实出发,阐 明21世纪在作为重要生产要素的知识产权已经成为社会科技进步和经济增长的主要动力的前 提下,技术创新政策与知识产权法律的协调配合就成为整个激励智力创造和技术创新制度安排 的必须。对技术创新政策与知识产权法律的协调机制从总体上进行探讨,并就科技计划制定和 科技战略规划、科技成果界定及其知识产权归属以及科技成果的奖励制度等方面作了具体研究。     

知识创新体系中信息资源管理的发展趋势之刍议

本文简要介绍了知识创新体系及其与信息管理的关系,分析探讨了信息资源管理的发展趋势,并从注重国家层次上的信息资源管理、网络信息资源管理成为新的热点、信息资源管理学科体系等方面进行了阐述。     

公共政策的非公共性——公共政策研究的新视角

公共政策的公共性是公共政策的应然属性,公共政策的非公共性则表现为公共政策的实然属性。公共政策的非公共性主要表现为公共政策主体的垄断性和自利性、公共政策问题的主观性、公共政策目标的非公平性、公共政策信息的非共享性等。公共政策的非公共性为公共政策研究提供了一个新视角,对其研究具有重要的理论意义和现实意义。     

Public preferences and the challenge to genetic research policy

Modern genetic research requires scientists to collect, store, and study DNA samples and health information from thousands of people. Longstanding policy allows researchers to use samples and information without a person''s informed consent as long as the person''s identity is protected. Under existing policy, researchers must neither disclose study results to interested research participants nor compensate people who contribute to genetic research. Research and ethics experts developed these policy approaches without input from the people whose contributions are essential to the genetic research enterprise. A growing body of evidence shows that many research participants and would-be participants disagree with the current policy approaches. For ethical and practical reasons, participants should have a greater role in determining how genetic research is conducted.     

公共政策制定的理论研究中的“村民”与“农民”概念辨析

构建和谐社会,落实科学发展观,离不开对“三农”问题的研究。长期以来,在关于“三农”问题与村民自治的公共政策制定和理论研究中,由于对“农民”与“村民”概念的片面理解和不规范使用,产生了严重的负面影响,对其规范使用已是势在必行。农民与村民本是两个外延不同,内涵既有同质性,但又有异质性的概念,二者不可相互替代。对其规范使用,有利于在公共政策制定和“三农”问题的理论研究上发挥正确导向和规范作用。     

Creative internationalization: widening the perspectives on analysis and policy regarding international R&D activities

Internationalization in R&D is further growing; it is changing its geographical balance, as it is shifting somewhat to the Far East, and its nature, increasing the global quest for talent and good research conditions as well as for low cost R&D. This paper focuses on the European perspective, i.e. it discusses current challenges Europe faces vis-à-vis trends in industrial R&D, but the findings and arguments are more general ones. It argues that our perspective on internationalization is still shaped too much by a zero sum-rationale, whereby one location wins R&D capacity that another location loses. It develops a cost–benefit matrix in order to capture the overall costs and benefits of international R&D activities more broadly. The paper argues that more creativity is needed, that our perspective needs to be broadened to tackle all variables conditioning international activities in R&D (including local conditions of demand and discourse) and to stress the importance of the absorption of global knowledge by as many actors within an innovation system as possible. On the basis of recent survey data the paper furthermore concludes that public research should be thought of as a trans-national transmission belt of knowledge and as the prime factor that shapes the attractiveness and effectiveness of a location for business R&D. Finally, it is argued that policy schemes geared towards international R&D need to accept and tackle the issue of co-ordination of governance and to take advantage of the flexible possibilities offered at the European level, beyond the logic of the European Framework Programme.

How research ethics' protections can contribute to public policy: the case of community treatment orders

Though community treatment orders (CTOs) were first used in 1986 in Australia, debate about their clinical and ethical merits continues even today. For some, the benefits of reduced frequency and duration of involuntary hospitalizations are believed to adequately outweigh the harms of restricted liberties in community living. For others, however, such benefits are believed to be achievable by simply arranging integrated, devoted community resources sans any threat of forced re-hospitalization. In response to this enduring controversy, this article examines the ethical merits of community orders using a novel approach. “Novel” because the examination is based on research ethics and its foundational principles.When hospital and community clinicians, family members, consumer/survivors, and advocacy groups discussed the idea of amending Ontario's mental health legislation to permit CTOs in the late 1990s, evidence of their effects and efficacy was very limited. Moreover, an order was characterized much like standard pharmacological or medical therapies because the person or an appropriate substitute decision maker's consent was necessary to authorize the order or make it valid. These two factors prompted this retrospective analysis: if CTOs - as a public policy initiative - had been treated like most other promising therapies, would any different ethics-related concerns have been raised that, in turn, would have benefited the public debate and the legislature's decisions? In other words, if respected safeguards that apply to new drugs and medical devices had applied to CTOs, would anything have changed?