<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">umj</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Университетское управление: практика и анализ</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>University Management: Practice and Analysis</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1999-6640</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1999-6659</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education «Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N.Yeltsin»; Non-Commercial Partnership “University Management: Practice and</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15826/umpa.2019.04.025</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">umj-1073</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>УПРАВЛЕНИЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯМИ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>INVESTIGATION MANAGEMENT</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Система оценки качества научных исследований в странах Европы</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Evaluation Methods for R&amp;D in European Countries</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Кириченко</surname><given-names>И. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Kirichenko</surname><given-names>I. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Кириченко Ирина Вадимовна – кандидат экономических наук, старший научный сотрудник отдела науки и инноваций </p><p>117997, Москва, ул. Профсоюзная, 23</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Irina V. Kirichenko – PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, Department for Science and Innovation</p><p>23 Profsouznaya str., Moscow, 117997</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">irakir54@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5125-3142</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Шелюбская</surname><given-names>Н. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Shelyubskaya</surname><given-names>N. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Шелюбская Наталья Владимировна – кандидат экономических наук, старший научный сотрудник отдела науки и инноваций </p><p>117997, Москва, ул. Профсоюзная, 23</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Natalia V. Shelyubskaya – PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, Department for Science and Innovation</p><p>23 Profsouznaya str., Moscow, 117997</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">n.sheliubskaya@imemo.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Национальный исследовательский институт мировой экономики и международных отношений им. Е. М. Примакова Российской академии наук</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2019</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>10</month><year>2019</year></pub-date><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>9</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Кириченко И.В., Шелюбская Н.В., 2019</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2019</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Кириченко И.В., Шелюбская Н.В.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Kirichenko I.V., Shelyubskaya N.V.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.umj.ru/jour/article/view/1073">https://www.umj.ru/jour/article/view/1073</self-uri><abstract><p>Статья представляет собой кейсы, раскрывающие опыт разработки и практики применения систем оценки качества и эффективности научных исследований университетских и других центров фундаментальной науки Великобритании, Нидерландов и Финляндии. Цель статьи – показать основные подходы к организации и методам оценки результативности научно-исследовательских работ в странах Западной Европы с высоким научным потенциалом на фоне развернувшейся дискуссии о роли количественных и экспертных методов при анализе отдачи в научной сфере. В работе применены описательный, исторический и сравнительный методы исследования. Определено, что оценки качества и состояния научных исследований в выбранной группе стран по большей части опираются на понимание сложности и неоднозначности научного поиска, следовательно, и того, что оценка эффективности исследований должна быть многоаспектной и комплексной, основываться как на экспертных, качественных оценках, так и на количественных (наукометрических и библиометрических) показателях, причем последние не должны быть доминирующими, а должны служить подспорьем для вынесения экспертного суждения. Новизна статьи состоит в детальном и более полном, по сравнению с аналогичными работами, анализе систем и критериев оценки качества исследований, факторов, лежащих в основе их эволюции в трех европейских странах с высокоразвитыми национальными научными системами. Показано становление современных систем оценки в соответствии с потребностями развития научного потенциала и необходимостью укрепления его конкурентоспособности на мировой арене. Это позволило сделать обоснованные выводы о сущностных общих чертах систем оценок и их адаптации к национальным особенностям, сформулировать рекомендации по использованию опыта западноевропейских стран для совершенствования практики оценки научно-исследовательской деятельности в университетах и НИИ России. Результаты работы также могут представлять интерес для научных работников, преподавателей вузов, аспирантов, студентов и всех интересующихся актуальными вопросами развития науковедения.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The paper is a case study of the experience of developing and using systems for evaluating the quality and effectiveness of scientific research within British, Dutch and Finnish universities and other fundamental scientific centers. The article aims at showing key organizational and methodical approaches for assessing the effectiveness of research in Western European countries against the background of the ensuing discussion about the role of quantitative and peer review methods in analyzing research results. Descriptive, historical and comparative methods are used. The assessments of quality and the state of research in the selected group of countries are found to be based mainly on the complexity and ambiguity of scientific pursuit and, consequently, on understanding that the evaluation of research effectiveness should be multidimensional and complex, that it should rest on expert quality assessment and quantitative (scientometric and bibliometric) indicators, the latter not to be dominant, but to serve as an advantage to expert judgment. The article gives new detailed and more complete (than the analogical works) analysis of the systems and criteria for assessing the quality of research together with the factors underlying their evolution in the three European countries with highly developed national scientific systems. There is shown the formation of modern evaluation systems in accordance with the needs for the development of scientific potential and with the need to strengthen its competitiveness on the international arena. This made it possible to draw valid conclusions about the essential general features of the assessment systems and about their adaptation to national characteristics, and to formulate recommendations on using the experience of Western European countries to improve the practice of evaluating research activities in Russian universities and research institutes. The results of the work may as well be of interest to researchers, university professors, postgraduates, students, and also to all those interested in topical issues of developing the science of science.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>методы оценки</kwd><kwd>качество исследований</kwd><kwd>результативность</kwd><kwd>библиометрия</kwd><kwd>экспертиза</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>evaluation methods</kwd><kwd>R&amp;D quality</kwd><kwd>effectiveness</kwd><kwd>bibliometrics</kwd><kwd>peer review</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), available at: https://sfdora.org/ (accessed: 24.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), available at: https://sfdora.org/ (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, April 2015, vol. 520, pp. 429–431., available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275335177 (accessed: 24.05.2019). DOI: 10.1038/520429a.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, April 2015, vol. 520, pp. 429–431., available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275335177 (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI: 10.1038/520429a.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Benedictus R., Miedema F., Ferguson M. J. Fewer numbers, better science. Nature 27 October 2016, vol. 538, iss. 7626, pp. 453–455, available at: https://www.nature.com/news/fewer-numbers-better-science-1.20858(accessed: 24.05.2019). DOI:10.1038/538453a.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Benedictus R., Miedema F., Ferguson M. J. Fewer numbers, better science. Nature 27 October 2016, vol. 538, iss. 7626, pp. 453–455., available at: https://www.nature.com/news/fewer-numbers-better-science-1.20858 (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI:10.1038/538453a</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wilsdon J., et al. The Metric Tide. Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. July 2015, 163 p., available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/files/2015/07/2015_metrictide.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019). DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wilsdon J., et al. The Metric Tide. Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. July 2015, 163 p., available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/files/2015/07/2015_metrictide.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Next-generation metrics: Responsible metrics and evaluation for open science. Report of the European Commission Expert Group on Altmetrics. EK, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, 2017, 26 p., available at: https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/report.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019). DOI:10.2777/337729.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Next-generation metrics: Responsible metrics and evaluation for open science. Report of the European Commission Expert Group on Altmetrics. EK, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, 2017, 26 p., available at: https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/report.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI:10.2777/337729</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sivertsen G. Unique, but still best practice? The Research Excellence Framework (REF) from an international perspective. Palgrave Communications. Published: 15 August 2017. 3:17078, available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201778 (accessed: 23.05.2019). DOI: 10.1057/palcomms.2017.78.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sivertsen G. Unique, but still best practice? The Research Excellence Framework (REF) from an international perspective. Palgrave Communications. Published: 15 August 2017. 3:17078, available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201778 (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI: 10.1057/palcomms.2017.78</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Zacharewicz T., Lepori B., Reale E., Jonkers K. Performance – based research funding in EU Member States – a comparative assessment. Science and Public Policy, 2019, vol. 46, no.1, pp. 105–115., available at: https://academic.oup.com/spp/article/46/1/105/5037253 (accessed: 23.05.2019). DOI. org/10.1093/scipol/scy041</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zacharewicz T., Lepori B., Reale E., Jonkers K. Performance – based research funding in EU Member States – a comparative assessment. Science and Public Policy, 2019, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 105–115, available at: https://academic.oup.com/spp/article/46/1/105/5037253 (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.). DOI.org/10.1093/scipol/scy041</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Паршин А. Н. Наука или библиометрия: кто кого? // Вестник Российской Академии наук. 2018. Т. 88. № 11. С. 982–984. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730002330-1</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Parshin A. N. Nauka ili bibliometriya: kto kogo? [Science or bibliometry: who will win?]. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2018, vol. 88, no 11, pp. 982–984. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730002330-1 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Иванчик А. И. Особенности оценки исследователей и исследовательских программ в гуманитарных науках// Вестник Российской Академии наук. 2018. Т. 88. № 11. С. 985–991. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730002331-2</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ivanchik A. I. Osobennosti otsenki issledovatelei i issledovatel’skikh programm v gumanitarnykh naukakh [Particular properties of evaluation of researchers and research programs in the humanities]. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2018, vol. 88, no. 11, pp. 985–991. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730002331-2 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Гринев А. В. Научные публикации и наукометрические показатели как объект нечистоплотного бизнеса // Вестник Российской Академии наук. 2018. Т. 88. № 10. С. 908–917. DOI: 10.31857/s086958730002147–9</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Grinyov A. V. Nauchnye publikatsii i naukometricheskie pokazateli kak ob»ekt nechistoplotnogo biznesa [Scientific publications and scientometric indicators as an object of unscrupulous business]. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2018, vol. 88, no 10, pp. 908–917. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730002147-9 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Global Innovation Index 2018: Energizing the World with Innovation. Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2018): Ithaca, Fontainebleau, and Geneva. 430 р. ISBN 979-10-95870-09-8, p. xx, available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2018.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Global Innovation Index 2018: Energizing the World with Innovation. Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2018): Ithaca, Fontainebleau, and Geneva. 430 p. ISBN 979-10-95870-09-8, p. xx, available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2018.pdf (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gross domestic expenditure on research and development, UK: 2017. Office for National Statistics, 14 March 2019, p. 13, available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/researchanddevelopmentexpenditure/bulletins/ukgrossdomesticexpenditureonresearchanddevelopment/2017 (accessed: 24.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gross domestic expenditure on research and development, UK: 2017. Office for National Statistics, 14 March 2019, 13 p., available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/govern-mentpublicsectorandtaxes/researchanddevelopmentexpenditure/bulletins/ukgrossdomesticexpenditureonresearchanddevelopment/2017 (accessed: 24.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">QS World University Ratings 2019, available at: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2019 (accessed 25.06.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">QS World University Ratings 2019, available at: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2019 (accessed 25.06.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Times Higher Education World University Rankings, available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2019/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats (accessed 23.06.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Times Higher Education World University Rankings, available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2019/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats (accessed 23.06.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">CWUR World University Rankings 2018–2019, available at: https://cwur.org/2018–19.php (accessed 23.06.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">CWUR World University Rankings 2018–2019, available at: https://cwur.org/2018–19.php (accessed 23.06.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Independent report. Research Excellence Framework review. An independent review of university research funding by Lord Nicholas Stern. Published 28 July 2016. Last updated 31 December 2018. From: Department for Business, Energy &amp; Industrial Strategy. Research Excellence Framework Review. Evidence Report. Technopolis group, October 2018, 116 p., available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/768162/research-excellence-framework-review-evidence-report.pdf (accessed: 23.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Independent report. Research Excellence Framework review. An independent review of university research funding by Lord Nicholas Stern. Published 28 July 2016. Last updated 31 December 2018. From: Department for Business, Energy &amp; Industrial Strategy. Research Excellence Framework Review. Evidence Report. Technopolis group, October 2018, 116 p., available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/768162/research-excellence-framework-review-evidence-report.pdf (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Independent report. Research Excellence Framework review. An independent review of university research funding by Lord Nicholas Stern. Published 28 July 2016. Last updated 31 December 2018. From: Department for Business, Energy &amp; Industrial Strategy. Research Excellence Framework (REF) review: Building on success and learning from experience. An Independent review of the Research Excellence Framework, July 2016, p. 6, available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-excellence-framework-review (accessed: 23.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Independent report. Research Excellence Framework review. An independent review of university research funding by Lord Nicholas Stern. Published 28 July 2016. Last updated 31 December 2018. From: Department for Business, Energy &amp; Industrial Strategy. Research Excellence Framework (REF) review: Building on success and learning from experience. An Independent review of the Research Excellence Framework, July 2016, p. 6, available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-excellence-framework-review (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Research Assessment Exercise 2014. Panel 10 – Social Sciences. Specific Criteria and Working Methods. (August 2013), available at: https://www.ugc.edu.hk/doc/eng/ugc/rae/psg_10_201308.pdf. (accessed: 23.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Research Assessment Exercise 2014. Panel 10 – Social Sciences. Specific Criteria and Working Methods. (August 2013), available at: https://www.ugc.edu.hk/doc/eng/ugc/rae/psg_10_201308.pdf. (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Total R&amp;D in the Netherlands by Sector of Performance and Source of Funds, R&amp;D Activity Type and Type of Costs. Rathenau Institut, available at: https://www.rathenau.nl/en/science-figures/investments/how-much-does-netherlandsspend-rd/total-rd-netherlands-sector (accessed 26.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Total R&amp;D in the Netherlands by Sector of Performance and Source of Funds, R&amp;D Activity Type and Type of Costs. Rathenau Institut, available at: https://www.rathenau.nl/en/science-figures/investments/how-much-does-netherlands-spend-rd/total-rd-netherlands-sector (accessed 26.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">R&amp;D Personnel and Researchers in the Netherlands by Sector. Rathenau Institut, available at: https://www.rathenau.nl/en/science-figures/personnel/rd-personnel-netherlands/rd-personnel-and-researchers-netherlands-sector (accessed 26.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">R&amp;D Personnel and Researchers in the Netherlands by Sector. Rathenau Institut, available at: https://www.rathenau.nl/en/science-figures/personnel/rd-personnel-netherlands/rd-personnel-and-researchers-netherlands-sector (accessed 26.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Standaard Evaluation Protocol 2015–2021. Protocol for Research Assessments in the Netherlands. The Netherlands, KNAW, VSNU, NWO, 2014. 31 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Standaard Evaluation Protocol 2015–2021. Protocol for Research Assessments in the Netherlands. The Netherlands, KNAW, VSNU, NWO, 2014. 31 p. (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Elizabeth Gadd. Research Evaluation: Things We Can Learn fron the Dutch. available at: https://thebibliomagician.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/research-evaluation-things-wecan-learn-from-the-dutch/ (accessed 26.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Elizabeth Gadd. Research Evaluation: Things We Can Learn fron the Dutch. available at: https://thebibliomagician.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/research-evaluation-things-wecan-learn-from-the-dutch/ (accessed 26.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Research and Development in Finland. Helsinki, Academy of Finland, 2019. 9 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Research and Development in Finland. Helsinki, Academy of Finland, 2019. 9 p. (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sivertsen G. Why has no other European country adopted the Research Excellence Framework? available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/why-has-no-other-european-country-adopted-the-research-excellence-framework/ (accessed: 23.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sivertsen G. Why has no other European country adopted the Research Excellence Framework, available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/why-has-no-other-european-country-adopted-the-research-excellence-framework/ (accessed: 23.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tieteen Tila 2018. Helsinki, Suomen Akatemia, 2018. 84 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tieteen Tila 2018. Helsinki, Suomen Akatemia, 2018. 84 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tieteen Tila 2016. Helsinki, Suomen Akatemia, 2016. 68 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tieteen Tila 2016. Helsinki, Suomen Akatemia, 2016. 68 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">The State of Scientific Research in Finland, 2012. Helsinki, Academy of Finland, 2012. 94 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">The State of Scientific Research in Finland, 2012. Helsinki, Academy of Finland, 2012. 94 p. (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Publication Forum has completed its review of ratings, available at: http://www.julkaisufoorumi.fi/fi/arkisto/tiedotteet/publication-forum-has-completed-its-review-ratings (accessed 26.05.2019).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Publication Forum has completed its review of ratings, available at: http://www.julkaisufoorumi.fi/fi/arkisto/tiedotteet/publication-forum-has-completed-its-review-ratings (accessed 26.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ilkka Hemmilä. Finnish Scientific Funding Favours Some Disciplines over Others. available at: https://www.tylkkari.fi/english/finnish-scientific-funding-favours-somedisciplines-over-others (accessed 26.05.2019)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ilkka Hemmilä. Finnish Scientific Funding Favours Some Disciplines over Others. available at: https://www.tylkkari.fi/english/finnish-scientific-funding-favours-some-disciplines-over-others (accessed 26.05.2019). (Eng.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
