本文關(guān)鍵詞：中美農(nóng)業(yè)智庫(kù)行為比較研究　出處：《情報(bào)雜志》2016年10期 　論文類型：期刊論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 智庫(kù) 農(nóng)業(yè)智庫(kù) 智庫(kù)行為 中國(guó) 美國(guó)

【摘要】：[目的/意義]中外智庫(kù)比較研究是智庫(kù)研究中的一個(gè)重要方面,不同社會(huì)文化背景、管理體制和運(yùn)行機(jī)制下智庫(kù)行為的比較,對(duì)中國(guó)智庫(kù)未來(lái)發(fā)展借鑒國(guó)際經(jīng)驗(yàn)具有重要意義。[方法/過(guò)程]選擇中美兩國(guó)不同類型的農(nóng)業(yè)類智庫(kù)作為典型案例,從科研學(xué)術(shù)、政策咨詢、社會(huì)輿論、合作交流四個(gè)方面,對(duì)比分析中美智庫(kù)的行為,由此透視中美智庫(kù)發(fā)展的差異性和規(guī)律特征。[結(jié)果/結(jié)論]發(fā)現(xiàn)中美兩國(guó)科研院所類智庫(kù)的學(xué)術(shù)行為都比大學(xué)附屬型智庫(kù)活躍;布魯金斯學(xué)會(huì)的科研學(xué)術(shù)行為和政策咨詢行為最為活躍;與美國(guó)相比,中國(guó)智庫(kù)的政策咨詢行為的影響力存在較大差距;美國(guó)民間智庫(kù)更加注重與媒體的溝通和聯(lián)系,通過(guò)各種途徑來(lái)擴(kuò)展自身的合作交流網(wǎng)絡(luò)。最后討論了美國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)對(duì)中國(guó)智庫(kù)建設(shè)的建議,以及中美智庫(kù)行為比較研究的未來(lái)。
[Abstract]:[Purpose / significance] the comparative study of Chinese and foreign think tanks is an important aspect in the research of think tanks. The comparison of think tanks behavior under different social culture background, management system and operation mechanism is of great significance for the future development of Chinese think tanks and learning from international experience. [method / process] select the different types of agricultural think tanks in China and the US as a typical case, and compare the behavior of Chinese and American think tanks from four aspects of academic research, policy consultation, public opinion and cooperation and exchange, so as to see the differences and characteristics of the development of Sino US think tanks. [Conclusion] the results / academic behavior of Sino US research institutes think-tank than university affiliated think-tank active; academic behavior at the Brookings Institution and policy advisory behavior is the most active; compared with the United States, there is a big gap between the policy consulting think tank influence behavior Chinese; communication and contact us to pay more attention to the media and think tanks, to expand their cooperation network through various channels. Finally, it discusses the suggestions of American experience on the construction of Chinese think tanks, and the future of the comparative study of the behavior of the Chinese and American think tanks.
【作者單位】： 沈陽(yáng)農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)經(jīng)濟(jì)管理學(xué)院;中國(guó)農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)院農(nóng)業(yè)信息研究所;
【基金】：中國(guó)農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)院科技創(chuàng)新工程項(xiàng)目“農(nóng)業(yè)知識(shí)組織與知識(shí)挖掘團(tuán)隊(duì)” 遼寧省社會(huì)科學(xué)規(guī)劃基金項(xiàng)目“遼寧省農(nóng)業(yè)智庫(kù)及其合作交流網(wǎng)絡(luò)研究”(編號(hào):L15CTQ003) 遼寧省教育科研管理智庫(kù)項(xiàng)目“遼寧省高�？蒲袡C(jī)構(gòu)合作交流網(wǎng)絡(luò)研究”(編號(hào):ZK2015093)
【分類號(hào)】：C932
【正文快照】： Liang Li1,2Zhang Xuefu2(1.The College of Economics and Management,Shenyang Agricultural University,Shenyang 110866;2.Institute of Agricultural Information,Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Beijing 100081)0引言隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)和技術(shù)的飛速發(fā)展進(jìn)步,中國(guó)政府，

本文編號(hào)：1340001