Frode Frederiksen, Finn Hansson and Søren Wenneberg
Additional contact information
Frode Frederiksen: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Postal: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Blaagaardsgade 23 B, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
Finn Hansson: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Postal: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Blaagaardsgade 23 B, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
Søren Wenneberg: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Postal: Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Blaagaardsgade 23 B, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
Abstract: The internal scientific evaluation of knowledge claims done by peer review is todayhas for the last 20 years been supplemented by new methods of knowledge assessment. These methods are usually taken from other sectors such as the public administration and the corporate sector. Because of their different backgrounds compared to the peer review method, it is necessary to critically examine them in relation to assessment of quality. But this also calls for a new understanding of science and knowledge. The article starts by briefly explaining this new understanding, before going into more details on the new methods of knowledge assessment and the perspectives behind them.
Keywords: The agora; The Triple Helix; research evaluation; research quality; a new understanding of science universities; industry.
16 pages, December 1, 2001
Full text files
6357
Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to Lars Nondal ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().
RePEc:hhb:cbslpf:2001_014This page generated on 2024-09-13 22:19:18.