基本理论与基本问题

有组织科研中集体行动的逻辑、困境与策略选择

  • 赵小丽 ,
  • 荀渊
展开
  • 华东师范大学高等教育研究所,上海 200062

网络出版日期: 2025-01-18

基金资助

国家社科基金“十三五”规划2020年度教育学重点课题“新时代提高教师地位的政策体系研究”(AFA200007)。

版权

华东师范大学学报期刊社, 2025, 版权所有,未经授权,不得转载、摘编本刊文章,不得使用本刊的版式设计。

The Logic, Dilemma and Strategic Choice of Collective Action in Organized Scientific Research

  • Xiaoli Zhao ,
  • Yuan Xun
Expand
  • Institute of Higher Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China

Online published: 2025-01-18

Copyright

, 2025, Copyright reserved © 2025.

摘要

有组织科研不仅是现代科学发展与知识创新的重要形式,而且已经成为世界各国促进科技创新的政策选项。世界科技发达国家日益依靠集体行动的力量以提升科研效率并实现有组织科研的目标。有组织科研在遵循将集体目标转化为个体行动、建立恰当有序的知识分工合作体系以及多主体互动交流的知识生产网络等逻辑进路的同时,也存在个人学术旨趣与共同目标之间的冲突、有组织科研中的知识互动冲突以及复杂结构的隐患等集体行动的困境。要激发有组织科研中集体行动的力量,可选择的策略主要涉及:将参与主体的个体意愿转化为集体承诺与共同契约、建立分工与合作体系以明确有组织科研不同参与主体在行动中的角色与责任和构建开放互动、民主协商的治理体系以发挥有组织科研参与方知识互动网络的集聚优势。

本文引用格式

赵小丽 , 荀渊 . 有组织科研中集体行动的逻辑、困境与策略选择[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2025 , 43(2) : 66 -77 . DOI: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2025.02.006

Abstract

Organized scientific research is not only an important form of modern scientific development and knowledge innovation, but also has become a policy option to promote scientific and technological innovation in countries around the world, and increasingly relies on the power of collective action to improve the efficiency of scientific research and achieve the goal of organized scientific research. While following the logical path of transforming collective goals into individual actions, establishing proper and orderly knowledge division and cooperation system and multi-agent interaction and communication knowledge production network, organized scientific research also faces the dilemma of collective action, such as the conflict between individual academic purview and common goals, the conflict of knowledge interaction in organized scientific research and the hidden danger of complex structure. To stimulate the power of collective action in organized research, alternative strategies involved are suggested as follows. The individual will of the participants is transformed into collective commitment and common contract; the division of labor and cooperation system is established to clarify the roles and responsibilities of different participants in organized scientific research; and the governance system of open interaction and democratic consultation is constructed to give play to the agglomeration advantages of the knowledge interaction network of organized scientific research participants.

参考文献

埃莉诺?奥斯特罗姆. (2000). 公共事物的治理之道(余逊达, 陈旭东, 译). 上海: 上海三联书店.
  奥尔森. (2011). 集体行动的逻辑(陈郁, 郭宇峰, 李崇新, 译). 上海: 格致出版社、上海人民出版社.
  巴伯. (1991). 科学与社会秩序(顾昕, 译). 北京: 生活?读书?新知三联书店.
  白强. (2023). 高校有组织科研: 发展趋势、逻辑转向与机制创新——基于知识生产模式变革视角的分析. 江苏高教, (07), 28- 37.
  保拉?斯蒂芬. (2016). 经济如何塑造科学(刘细文, 译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
  彼得?J. 维斯特维克. (2023). 国家实验室: 美国体制中的科学(1947—1974)(钟扬, 黄艳燕, 顾卓雅, 译). 上海: 上海科学技术出版社.
  布什. (2004). 科学: 无止境的前沿(范岱年, 解道华, 译. )北京: 商务印书馆.
  查尔斯?汉迪. (2017). 我们身在何方?个人与组织的精准定位(周旭华, 译). 上海: 东方出版中心.
  陈霞玲. (2023). 高校开展有组织科研的组织模式、经验特征与问题对策. 国家教育行政学院学报, (07), 78- 87.
  大卫?利文斯通. (2017). 科学知识的地理(孟锴, 译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
  国家统计局. (2023). 中华人民共和国2022年国民经济和社会发展统计公报. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/zxfb/202302/t20230228_1919011.html.
  海尔格?诺沃特尼, 彼得?斯科特, 迈克尔?吉本斯. (2011). 反思科学: 不确定时代的知识与公众(冷民, 徐秋慧, 译). 上海: 上海交通大学出版社.
  吉本斯. (2011). 知识生产的新模式(陈洪捷, 沈文钦, 译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
  教育部. 关于加强高校有组织科研 推动高水平自立自强的若干意见. http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/202208/t20220829_656091.html.
  堺屋太一. (1987). 知识价值革命(黄晓勇, 译. )北京: 生活?读书?新知三联书店.
  利奥塔. (1996). 后现代状况(岛子, 译). 长沙: 湖南美术出版社.
  联合国教科文组织. (2022). 一起重新构想我们的未来. 北京: 教育科学出版社.
  刘易斯?科塞. (2004). 理念人: 一项社会学的考察(郭方, 译). 北京: 中央编译出版社.
  罗杰?盖格, 高筱卉. (2023). 论美国大学中有组织的研究单位. 高等工程教育研究, (05), 171- 180.
  米努什?沙菲克. (2022)新社会契约(李艳, 译). 北京: 中信出版社.
  乔恩?格特纳. (2016). 贝尔实验室与美国革新大时代(王勇, 译). 北京: 中信集团出版社.
  唐纳德?肯尼迪. (2002). 学术责任(阎凤桥, 译). 北京: 新华出版社.
  滕尼斯. (1999). 共同体与社会(林荣远, 译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
  涂尔干. (2020). 社会分工论(渠敬东, 译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
  薛凤, 柯安哲. (2019). 科学史新论: 范式更新与视角转化(吴秀杰, 译). 杭州: 浙江大学出版社.
  雅斯贝尔斯. (1989)历史的起源与目标(魏楚雄, 俞新天, 译). 北京: 华夏出版社.
  约翰?罗尔斯, (2009). 正义论(何怀宏, 何包钢, 廖申白, 译). 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
  约翰·齐曼. (1985). 知识的力量: 科学的社会范畴(许立达, 译). 上海: 上海科技出版社.
  约翰?齐曼. (2002). 真科学(曾国屏, 匡辉, 张成岗, 译). 上海: 上海科技教育出版社.
  张娟, 荀振芳. (2023). 高校有组织科研的内涵、特征及实施路径. 高等工程教育研究, (06), 99- 104.
  赵万里. (1998). 特殊群体: 科学家的工作方式. 南京: 南开大学出版社.
  周海涛, 蒋晓蝶. (2023). 高校有组织科研的逻辑进路. 现代大学教育, (05), 1- 8+112.
  Abramo, G., D’angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2019). The collaboration behavior of top scientists. Scientometrics, 118, 215- 232.
  Adams, J. D., Black, G. C., Clemmons, J. R., & Stephan, P. E. (2005). Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from US universities, 1981–1999. Research policy, 34 (3), 259- 285.
  Aldieri, L., Kotsemir, M., & Vinci, C. P. (2018). The impact of research collaboration on academic performance: An empirical analysis for some European countries. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 62, 13- 30.
  Bentley, P. J., Gulbrandsen, M., & Kyvik, S. (2015). The relationship between basic and applied research in universities. Higher Education, 70, 689- 709.
  Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research policy, 33 (4), 599- 616.
  Carayannis, E. G., Campbell, D. F., & Grigoroudis, E. (2022). Helix trilogy: The triple, quadruple, and quintuple innovation helices from a theory, policy, and practice set of perspectives. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13 (3), 2272- 2301.
  Chan, H. F., ?nder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2015). Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception?. Scientometrics, 105, 2215- 2235.
  Corrocher, N., & Lenzi, C. (2022). Exploring the sources of knowledge diversity in founding teams and its impact on new firms’ innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 32 (4), 1091- 1118.
  De Lima Figueiredo, N., Fernandes, C. I., & Abrantes, J. L. (2023). Triple helix model: Cooperation in knowledge creation. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 14 (2), 854- 878.
  DeMarrais, E., & Earle, T. (2017). Collective action theory and the dynamics of complex societies. Annual review of anthropology, 46, 183- 201.
  Eixeira de Melo A, Caves L S D, Dewitt A et al. (2020). Thinking (in) complexity: (In) definitions and (mis) conceptions. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, (1), 154- 169.
  Physics World. (2019). Preparing for a post-LHC future. https://physicsworld.com/a/preparing-for-a-post-lhc-future/.
  Figueiredo, R., Soliman, M., Al-Alawi, A. N., & Fatnassi, T. (2023). Could the ‘Spinner Innovation’and ‘Triple Helix’Models Improve System Innovation?. Applied System Innovation, 6 (2), 42.
  Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., B?rner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojevi?, S., & Barabási, A. L. (2018). Science of science. Science, 359 (6379), eaao0185.
  Geiger, R. L. (2017). Research and relevant knowledge: American research universities since World War II. New York: Routledge.
  Geiger, R. L. (1990). Organized research units -their role in the development of university research. The Journal of Higher Education, 1—19.
  Gilbert, M. (2006). Rationality in collective action. Philosophy of the social sciences, 36 (1), 3- 17.
  Hall, K. L., Vogel, A. L., Stipelman, B. A., Stokols, D., Morgan, G., & Gehlert, S. (2012). A four-phase model of transdisciplinary team-based research: goals, team processes, and strategies. Translational behavioral medicine, 2 (4), 415- 430.
  Hallonsten O. P. (2016). Big science transformed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  Hallonsten, O. (2014). How scientists may‘benefit from the mess’: A resource dependence perspective on individual organizing in contemporary science. Social Science Information, 53 (3), 341- 362.
  Hicks, D. J. (2021). Productivity and interdisciplinary impacts of Organized Research Units. Quantitative Science Studies, 2 (3), 990- 1022.
  Laamanen, M., & Sk?lén, P. (2015). Collective–conflictual value co-creation: A strategic action field approach. Marketing Theory, 15 (3), 381- 400.
  Martín-Sempere, M., Rey-Rocha, J., & Garzón-García, B. (2002). The effect of team consolidation on research collaboration and performance of scientists. Case study of Spanish university researchers in Geology. Scientometrics, 55 (3), 377- 394.
  Massimo Franceschet, Antonio Costantini. (2010), The effect of Scholar Collaboration on Impact and Quality of Academic Papers. Journal of Informetrics, (4), 540—553.
  Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research policy, 29 (1), 31- 40.
  Mors, M. L., & Waguespack, D. M. (2021). Fast success and slow failure: the process speed of dispersed research teams. Research Policy, 50 (5), 104222.
  Ooms, W., Werker, C., Cani?ls, M. C., & Van Den Bosch, H. (2015). Research orientation and agglomeration: Can every region become a Silicon Valley?. Technovation, 45, 78- 92.
  Ostrom, E. (2010). Analyzing collective action. Agricultural economics, 41, 155- 166.
  Perovi?, S., Radovanovi?, S., Sikimi?, V., & Berber, A. (2016). Optimal research team composition: data envelopment analysis of Fermilab experiments. Scientometrics, 108, 83- 111.
  Rajkumar, K., Saint-Jacques, G., Bojinov, I., Brynjolfsson, E., & Aral, S. (2022). A causal test of the strength of weak ties. Science, 377 (6612), 1304- 1310.
  Shavinina, L. V. (2004). Explaining high abilities of Nobel laureates. High Ability Studies, 15 (2), 243- 254.
  Sonnenwald, D. H. (2007). Scientific collaboration. Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol., 41 (1), 643- 681.
  Stvilia B, Hinnant C C, Schindler K, et al. (2011). Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (2), 270- 283.
  Talke K, Salomo S, Rost K. (2010). How top management team diversity affects innovativeness and performance via the strategic choice to focus on innovation fields. Research Policy, 39(7), 907—918.
  Welch D, Yates L. (2018). The practices of collective action: Practice theory, sustainability transitions and social change. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 48 (3), 288- 305.
  Whittington K B. (2018). A tie is a tie? Gender and network positioning in life science inventor collaboration. Research Policy, 47 (2), 511- 526.
  Yan L, Panteli N. (2011). Order and disorder in a Born Global organisation. New Technology. Work and Employment, 26 (2), 127- 145.
文章导航

/