世界科技研究与发展 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (4): 550-560.doi: 10.16507/j.issn.1006-6055.2025.05.002 cstr: 32308.14.1006-6055.2025.05.002

• 科技管理与政策 • 上一篇    

荷兰科技人才评价改革实践及启示——基于对“认可和奖励计划”的分析

王浩源1,2 徐芳1,2   

  1. 1.中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院;2.中国科学院大学公共政策与管理学院
  • 发布日期:2025-07-18
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金“复杂系统视角下我国科技评价制度均衡研究”(72174191)

Practice and Enlightenment of the Reform of Scientific and Technological Talents Evaluation in the Netherlands Based on Analysis of the Recognition & Rewards Programme

WANG Haoyuan1,2 XU Fang1,2   

  1. 1. Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences; 2. School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences
  • Published:2025-07-18

摘要: 近年来,国际科研评价改革愈演愈烈,科技人才评价改革成为各国关注的焦点。深受《改革科研评价的旧金山宣言》影响的荷兰是欧洲科技评价改革的卓越代表,于2022年底正式在国家和机构层面开展了被称为“认可和奖励计划”的系统性变革,并于2024年底完成改革第一阶段。荷兰科技人才评价改革采用了“国家统筹-机构试点”的路径,改革节奏与我国基本同步。因此,本文聚焦荷兰科技人才评价改革,从改革背景、实施路径及其效果等方面进行了剖析,并以乌得勒支大学医学中心改革实践为例,探讨了其在科技人才分类和评价标准上的具体做法。研究总结提炼了荷兰科技人才评价改革的实践经验并结合我国科技人才评价改革实际情况,提出了四方面建议,以期为我国下一阶段的科技人才评价改革试点工作提供参考。

关键词: 科技人才评价;改革试点;旧金山宣言;荷兰;认可和奖励计划

Abstract: In recent years, international reform of scientific research evaluation has intensified, with the evaluation of scientific and technological talent becoming a focal point of concern for various countries. Influenced by the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, the Netherlands has emerged as a leading representative of research evaluation reform in Europe. At the end of 2022, it officially launched a systematic reform called the Recognition & Rewards Programme at the national and institutional levels, aiming to complete the first phase of reform by the end of 2024. The Netherlands’ reform of scientific and technological talent evaluation follows a “national coordination-institutional pilot” approach, and its pace of reform aligns closely with that of our country. Therefore, this paper focuses on the reform of scientific and technological talent evaluation in the Netherlands, analyzing aspects such as the background of the reform, implementation pathways, and its effects, and uses the example of the reform practices at the University Medical Center Utrecht to explore specific methods in talent categorization and evaluation standards. This study summarizes and refines the practical experience of the Netherlands’ science and technology talent evaluation reform and combines it with the actual situation of China’s science and technology talent evaluation reform, and puts forward four suggestions in order to provide a reference for China’s next stage of science and technology talent evaluation reform pilot work.

Key words: Scientific and Technological Talents Evaluation; Reform Pilot; DORA; Netherlands; Recognition & Rewards Programme