首页> 外文期刊>Foresight >Comparing recent technology foresight studies in Korea and China: towards foresight-minded governments?
【24h】

Comparing recent technology foresight studies in Korea and China: towards foresight-minded governments?

机译:比较韩国和中国的最新技术预见研究:面向有远见的政府?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose - This paper seeks to compare recent third generation technology foresight studies in South Korea and mainland China. Both studies were released in 2005. Design/methodology/approach - Review of the foresight reports released by the Chinese and Korean governments (not available in English), interviews with the project leaders of foresight studies. Findings - China is relatively behind Korea in the sophistication of its technology foresight methodology. Chinese foresight is second generation (technology focus) whereas Korea's is third generation (society focus). There is no example of policy up-take of TF results in China so far but there was one very recent example in Korea. There was no private sector participation in using Chinese foresight results; however, there was limited participation in Korea. Foresight methodology should be generally enhanced. Practical implications - A better link between policy-making and foresight process is needed. This requires changes at both ends. Governance issues of foresight are addressed towards the end of the paper. Originality/value - Original, unpublished competitive paper for the ASIALICS 2006 International Conference, Shanghai, April 2006.
机译:目的-本文旨在比较韩国和中国大陆最近的第三代技术预见研究。两项研究均于2005年发布。设计/方法/方法-审查中国和韩国政府发布的前瞻性报告(未提供英文),与前瞻性研究项目负责人进行访谈。调查结果-中国在技术预见方法的先进性方面相对落后于韩国。中国的远见是第二代(关注技术),而韩国的是第三代(关注社会)。迄今为止,在中国尚无政策采纳TF结果的例子,但在韩国却有最近的例子。没有私人部门参与使用中国的预测结果。但是,在韩国的参与有限。前瞻性方法应普遍增强。实际意义-需要在决策和预见过程之间建立更好的联系。这需要两端都进行更改。在本文结尾处将解决具有远见的治理问题。原创性/价值-2006年4月在上海举行的ASIALICS 2006国际会议的原始论文,未发表。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号