In the field of science and technology policies, for the most part, evaluation procedures are utilized as a way of measuring the scientific and technological quality or the socio-economic impacts of publicly funded research. Beyond this practice, could evaluation procedures be used as a medium for the 'moderation' of struggles, controversies and negotiations in the science and technology policy arena? The present article addresses this question using the German evaluation practice—moulded by a relatively high degree of institutional differentiation and autonomy of the major policy actors—as a background. After some theoretical considerations, a case study is presented illustrating the ‘moderation approach’: a multi-annual monitoring evaluation of eight newly created, publicly funded interdisciplinary clinical research centres at German university hospitals.
|Number of pages||19|
|Publication status||Published - 1998|