• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

›› 2014, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (4): 493-500.

• 科学学理论与方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

孵化器的概念及其角色演变——基于《人民日报》数据库的扎根理论分析

王路昊1,王程韡2   

  1. 1. 清华大学社会科学学院科学技术与社会研究所
    2. 清华大学科技与社会研究所
  • 收稿日期:2013-08-09 修回日期:2013-11-19 出版日期:2014-04-15 发布日期:2014-04-16
  • 通讯作者: 王路昊
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目“企业内外创新资源耦合机制与开放决策”;清华大学文化传承创新基金

The Evolution of Definition and Role Model for Incubators in China: A Grounded Theory Analysis to the “People’s Daily” Database

  • Received:2013-08-09 Revised:2013-11-19 Online:2014-04-15 Published:2014-04-16

摘要: 孵化器是科技政策体系中的一个基本概念,却很难对其进行准确的界定。本文延续《告别蓝色天空》中的“划界工作”传统,通过对《人民日报》数据库中包括孵化器政策背景、理念和工具等相关概念的扎根理论分析发现,推动科技成果产业化一直是我国孵化器事业的终极使命,也构成威权主义的政治经济体制下长期存续的“环境神话”。对此,“自上而下”和“条块分割”的话语生成机制是造成制度场域僵固的结构性原因,以至于对国外经验的借鉴、学术界的决策咨询,以及分散性的地方性试验所提供的“最佳实践”都呈现为选择性的学习。要解决我国孵化器建设低水平同质化的矛盾,必训理顺“自下而上”再“自上而下”的话语循环。

关键词: 孵化器, 制度场域, 划界工作, 扎根理论, 人民日报, Incubator, Institutional Filed, Boundary Works, Grounded Theory, People’s Daily

Abstract: Definitional ambiguity always surrounds the concept of incubators, which is considered to be one of the core concepts in science and technology policy system. Follow the “boundary works” tradition which proposed by Jane Calvert in her book “Goodbye blue skies? The concept of 'basic research' and its role in a changing funding environment”, as well as employ the grounded theory method, this paper argues that the commercialization and industrialization of the S&T achievement is the ultimate mission for incubators’ construction in China, which also plays a continuous role of "institutional myths" in the authoritarianism regime. The structural occasion for the inflexibility of the institutional field lies on the policy discourse generation mechanism featured by “top-down” and “Tiao-Kuai segmentation”, while in turn lead to a selective learning to the oversea expertise, advices from the domestic academy, and the “best practice” in local policy experimentation. To solve the problem of low-quality isomorphism in incubators’ development in China, the discourse circle should really start from “bottom-up” and then “top-down”.

中图分类号: