Search results

This chapter provides a historical overview of policies on higher education in South Korea since 1945 and illustrates growth of science production based on expansion of higher education.

We divide higher education policies into three historical time periods: (1) 1945–1950s, a period of developing modern higher education system; (2) 1960s–early 1990s, a period of rapid expansion of higher education, while government establishing a few research-focused science and technology institutions aimed at better quality research production; and (3) since mid-1990s, a period of fostering the workforce and raising science productivity in universities using targeted investments in research. We use the SPHERE project’s comprehensive historical dataset based on Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science and data from Higher Education in Korea to analyze growth in scientific publication in national and organizational level.

The analysis suggests that the combined private and public investments in the expansion of higher education, and sequential policy intervention facilitated the massive and ongoing growth of science production in Korea.

The chapter provides a thorough description about the growth of higher education and science production in South Korea and draws lessons for developing capacity for producing science.

The role of social science in the curriculum of technical institutions of higher learning has always represented a series of tradeoff challenges and opportunities. Recently, issues to be addressed by those developing curricula for this audience have received increased attention. The difficulties that social and physical scientists have had collaborating on research projects have also been a matter of increasing attention and concern. Hence, to enrich this discussion we will offer a historical case study covering a 35-year (so far) experiment at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) in which both organizational and educational issues had to be addressed as faculty members of both backgrounds worked with technical students on educational projects dealing with social issues.

This chapter describes the changing nature of Japanese science production. The author explains Japan’s rise to prominence as the country with the second largest number of annual research publications in the world, followed by its subsequent decline to fifth in the world. The chapter highlights implications for Japanese universities of shifts in research policy.

The author examines bibliometric data as well as contextual data from Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology to analyze the contributions of Japanese universities in STEM+ research from 1975 to 2010. The chapter examines changes in higher education funding policies and their relationship to university-based production of STEM+ research articles in recent decades. The chapter also includes brief comparative analyses with selected other countries, including highly productive countries in Asia (China, Korea, and Taiwan), Western Europe (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), as well as the United States.

Bibliometric data show that Japan’s second-tier research universities contributed to Japan’s rise to the second largest producer of STEM+ scientific research. When these second-tier research universities received less money from the government, their scientific output declined and aggregate national research output declined relative to other countries.

The chapter uses more recent and comprehensive data than other studies of research output of Japanese universities and offers several implications for research policy and higher education funding. Indeed, the chapter argues that second-tier universities are the “unsung heroes” of Japanese science production. The chapter also suggests that Japanese policymakers may need to reconsider their reliance on competitive funding over block grants that sustain research universities.

This chapter is devoted to sustainable human resource management that leads to sustainable competitiveness. It features the ways human resources can be managed to carry out sustainable goals and the impact of sustainability on employees' attitudes and behaviours. The aim of this study is to explore the complex objectives of sustainability and human resource management and empirically investigate the dynamic relationship between human resources in science and technology and sustainable competitiveness in the case of 35 European countries. Our contribution emphasizes this interrelationship and its causality. For this research, we applied a vector auto-regression (VAR) model, and the Granger causality method to examine the relationship between human resources in science and technology and sustainable competitiveness. A panel data included 314 observations between 2012 and 2021. The panel VAR for analysing the impulse response function was enriched with the 5% and 95%, using Monte Carlo simulations. The research results revealed bidirectional causality in the European countries between human resources in science and technology and sustainable competitiveness. Human resources in science and technology trigger sustainable competitiveness and vice versa. As an element of originality, our study demonstrates that human resources in science and technology contribute to sustainable performance, and, on the other hand, a more competitive and sustainable environment contributes to the development of human resources in science and technology. Thus, the chapter outlines the role of human resources in science and technology with regard to sustainable human resource management (HRM), and how to navigate these objectives so that they can positively influence sustainable competitiveness.

In this paper, we present and apply a new framework – the Poles of Production for Producers/Poles of Production for Users (PFP/PFU) model – to empirically study how one particular group of academic scientists has responded to neoliberal changes in science policy and funding in Canada. The data we use are from a qualitative case study of 20 basic health scientists affiliated with a research-intensive university in a large Canadian city. We use the PFP/PFU model to explore the symbolic strategies (the vision of scientific quality) and practical strategies (the acquisition of funding and production of knowledge outputs) scientists adopt to maintain or advance their own position of power in the scientific field. We also compare similarities and differences among scientists trained before and after the rise of neoliberal policy. The PFP/PFU model allows us to see how these individual strategies cumulatively contribute to the construction of dominant and alternate modes of knowledge production. We argue that the alignments and misalignments between quality vision and practice that scientists in this study experienced reflect the symbolic struggles that are occurring among scientists, and between the scientific and political field, over two competing logics and reward systems (PFP/PFU).