Publishing a book 4

Starting Article 21

Chapter 1: Korean Science and Technology Policy: Questioning Identity 27
Section 1: What is Academic Identity? 27
Section 2: How has Korean science and technology policy developed? 29
Section 3: Where Does Korean Science and Technology Policy Stand? 32

Chapter 2: The Starting Point of Science and Technology Policy Theorization: Paradigm 37
Section 1: Current Status of Books on Science and Technology Policy Studies 37
1.
Changes in the Background of Science and Technology Policy Studies over Time 38
2.
The Definition and Scope of Science and Technology Policy and the "Study" of Science and Technology Policy 41
Section 2: Definition and Scope of Science and Technology Policy 46
1.
Changing Definitions of Science and Technology Policy 46
2.
Discussion on the Scope of Science and Technology Policy 48
Section 3: Academic Definition of Science and Technology Policy Studies 51
1.
Definition of Science and Technology Policy 51
2.
Key Characteristics of Science and Technology Policy Studies 52
Section 4: A 'New' Proposal for the Scope of Science and Technology Policy Studies 56
1.
The need to expand the scope of research 56
2.
Proposal for four major research scopes 57
3.
Analysis Level and Target 57
4.
Specific details of the four major research areas 59
1) Science and Technology Policy Process 59
2) Public Management of Science and Technology 60
3) Research Management 62
4) Technological innovation 63
Section 5: Paradigm Formation and Academic Identity of Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 64

Chapter 3: Foundations of Science and Technology Policy Theorizing 69
Section 1: Intellectual Structure and Research Methods of Academic Studies 69
1.
Discussion of Academic Intellectual Structure 69
1) The meaning of academic intellectual structure 69
2) Interdisciplinary research and researcher characteristics 72
2.
Research Methods for the Intellectual Structure of Academic Studies 73
1) Intellectual Structure Research and Bibliometrics 73
2) Author co-citation analysis and author-bibliographic combination analysis 75
3.
78 journals analyzed
4.
Selection of authors for analysis 80
1) Author Scoring Method 80
2) Author selection scale 82
5.
Visualization of Intellectual Structure and Centrality Analysis 83
6.
Entropy 85
Section 2: Core Background Studies in Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 85
1.
The number of journals and authors selected for analysis was 86.
2.
Main research scope and parent discipline 88
1) Author clusters and main research scopes of author-bibliographic association analysis 88
2) Research trends by cited author by period 91
3) Analysis of the centrality of cited authors 93
4) Main research scope and relationship with parent discipline 99
3.
Intellectual Structure Perspective: Central Background Studies 104
4.
Growing into an interdisciplinary field through diversification of background studies 106
Section 3: Theory-Providing Studies in Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 109
1.
The number of journals and authors selected for analysis was 109.
2.
Main research scope and related disciplines 112
1) Author clusters and main research scope of author co-citation analysis 112
2) Research trends by cited author by period 116
3) Centrality analysis of cited authors 119
4) Main research scope and relationship with related disciplines 124
3.
Theory-providing discipline from an intellectual structure perspective 129
4.
Enhancing theorization through expanding the knowledge base 130
Section 4: Building Academic Identity through Diversification of Intellectual Structure 131

Chapter 4: Prospects for the Theorization of Science and Technology Policy Studies 137
Section 1: In-Depth Interviews with Academic Experts 137
1.
Interviewee Selection 138
1) Selection criteria 138
2) Selection method 139
3) Interviewer characteristics 141
2.
In-depth interview questionnaire 143
3.
Conducting in-depth interviews 144
Section 2: The Level of Theorization in Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 145
1.
Academic Identity 146
2.
Research scope 148
3.
Interdisciplinary Structure 153
4.
Interdisciplinary level 157
Section 3: Theorizing Directions in Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 160
1.
The need to improve the level of theorizing 160
2.
Establishing the scope and field of research 162
3.
Development of unique theories and independent research methods 164
1) Existing theories and research methods 164
2) Establishing relationships with related academic fields 165
3) Exploring differences from research in other countries 166
Section 4: Promoting Theorization and Establishing Academic Identity 168

Chapter 5: The Reality of Institutionalizing Science and Technology Policy Studies 173
Section 1: Current Status of Related Courses Offered at Undergraduate and Graduate Schools 173
Section 2: Current Status of Independent Departments (Majors) in Graduate Schools 176
1.
Stage 1: Establishment of Indigenous Departments (1990s–2010s) 176
2.
Phase 2: Expansion through the Science and Technology Policy Graduate School Project (2010s-2020s) 178
3.
Stage 3: Expanding Specialization through the Practical Graduate School Program (2020s) 178

Chapter 6: The Challenges of Institutionalizing Science and Technology Policy Studies 183
Section 1: Theory of Curriculum Design 183
1.
Curriculum Concepts and Curriculum Design Principles 183
1) Three perspectives that differ from the concept of curriculum 184
2) Concepts and Principles of Curriculum Design 185
2.
Preliminary Research on Domestic Curriculum Design 187
Section 2: Current Status of Science and Technology Policy Curriculum in Graduate Schools 191
1.
Curriculum Orientation in Science and Technology Policy Studies 191
1) Basic Curriculum: Training Policy Specialist Researchers 191
2) Specialized Subjects: Aiming for Identity as an Independent Discipline 192
3) Procedural Knowledge Curriculum: Policy Process Improvement Knowledge 195
4) Content Knowledge Curriculum: Understanding Modern Science and Technology Knowledge 195
2.
Curriculum Design Models and Principles for Science and Technology Policy Studies 196
3.
Current Status and Limitations of Science and Technology Policy Curriculum in Graduate Schools 197
1) Curriculum Design Model 198
2) Selection of educational content 200
3) Educational content composition 208
Section 3: Directions for Curriculum Development in Korean Science and Technology Policy Studies 212
1.
Prerequisite: Maintaining a minimum common curriculum and pursuing diversification and differentiation 213
2.
Design Model Perspective: Seeking Balance Among the Three Major Design Models 214
3.
Selecting Curriculum Content: Adjusting Subject Variance and Ensuring Balance Between Subject Types 216
4.
Curriculum Structure: Providing a Curriculum that Provides a Sequential Learning Plan 219
5.
Curriculum Proposal for Graduate School Science and Technology Policy Studies 220
Section 4: Standardizing the Curriculum and Enhancing Academic Institutionalization 221

Closing remarks 227

Reference 237

Search 253

The motivation for writing this book dates back over ten years.
In 2013, I took the lead in establishing the 'Science and Technology Policy' major at Chungnam National University Graduate School.
At that time, the science and technology policy major got off to a smooth start with many researchers from the Daedeok Innopolis and the Sejong National Research Complex enrolling.

Since then, Chungnam National University's Science and Technology Policy major has continued to grow and develop, with the number of students increasing and the number of graduates receiving master's and doctoral degrees increasing.
However, during this process, participating professors and students continue to have several academic questions.

(1) How should we define "Science and Technology Policy Studies" as an independent discipline? (2) What should be taught and researched in science and technology policy studies? (3) Do science and technology policy majors possess specialized competencies that differentiate them from those majoring in business administration, economics, policy studies, public administration, and innovation theory? (4) Does the curriculum for science and technology policy majors contribute to the realization of the discipline's identity by learning and developing the unique theories of science and technology policy studies?
In our country, quite a few researchers say that their major is 'science and technology policy.'
However, they are discussing science and technology policy from their own academic backgrounds and proposing the scope of education and research in science and technology policy studies in a way that a hundred schools of thought contend.
Faced with this reality, I have the very challenging idea that, in order to fundamentally solve the problem, we must establish science and technology policy studies as an independent discipline.
My plan, which might be considered somewhat reckless, was slowly but surely concretized as I taught my major and supervised master's and doctoral students' theses.

The authors conducted three sequential research studies to write this book.
The first study was a planned study conducted by the Korea Society for Technology Innovation in 2017 to commemorate its 20th anniversary.
Through this research, the authors proposed an academic definition and research scope for science and technology policy studies as an independent discipline.
The second study is a 2021 doctoral dissertation by co-author Dr. Hyunjeong Oh.
Dr. Oh successfully completed his dissertation, "The Intellectual Structure of Korean Science and Technology Policy Research," over a period of two years, a challenging topic for a young researcher.
Through this, we confirmed that the background studies and theoretical studies of science and technology policy in our country are identical to those of business administration, economics, and policy studies.

The third study, conducted in 2024, analyzed the curricula of science and technology policy departments in 18 graduate schools in Korea, identified limitations, and proposed a curriculum that would align with the academic identity of science and technology policy studies in the future.
A systematic and standardized curriculum is a shortcut to enhancing academic identity by enabling future generations to learn and disseminate the theoretical framework of the discipline.

The numerous studies that make up the content of this book were conducted with funding from the "Science and Technology Policy Professional Training Support Project" (2016-2022) funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT and the National Human Resources Development Institute for Science and Technology, and the "Humanities and Social Sciences Research Institute Support Project" (2019-2025) funded by the Ministry of Education and the National Research Foundation of Korea.
Thanks to two rounds of research funding, the authors were able to conduct research steadily over a long period of time.
Additionally, during the process of conducting detailed research, there were graduate students and fellow researchers, both senior and junior, who provided constructive opinions in classes and various research meetings.
With their help and encouragement, the authors were able to select terminology more appropriate to the subject matter of this book and systematize related concepts.
Although it's late, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to everyone who helped me, even if only on paper.
Finally, the ideas discussed and proposed in this book will need to be further refined and logically developed through intense academic verification and discussion.
This is because establishing science and technology policy studies, a still-new field of study, as an independent discipline cannot be achieved through the efforts of just one or two scholars.
Therefore, the authors hope that this book will serve as an opportunity for the relevant academic community to take greater interest in developing science and technology policy studies as an independent discipline.


-Author's Preface