RESEARCH PAPER
A Study of Evaluation Mechanism through the Experience of French and Taiwan’s Innovation Strategies
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Chung Hua University, Hsinchu, TAIWAN
Online publish date: 2018-03-01
Publish date: 2018-03-01
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(5):1859–1865
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
When a science park or a technology park react to a transformation in the world, it becomes important to determine how to eliminate components with poor performance that have not contributed to the country’s overall research and development targets. The theory and goal of competitiveness clusters and technology parks in France is similar. The territory of the Technology Park is a type of organization with a structure that can be re-organized, just as the concept of Fractal Theory, to become diversified into an organization through re-organization. This study uses the Fuzzy Delphi method to investigate France and Taiwan’s innovation strategies by analysing the degree of recognition of park evaluation items in an expert questionnaire as a preliminary study of park evaluation in developing Science Parks in Taiwan.
 
REFERENCES (13)
1.
Aiginger, K. (1998). A Framework for Evaluating the Dynamic Competitiveness of Countries. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 9, 159–188.
 
2.
Blanke, J., Paua, F., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (2003). The Growth Competitiveness Index: Analyzing Key Underpinnings of Sustained Economic Growth. The Global Competitiveness Yearbook 2003–2004, pp. 3-28, World Economic Forum, Lausanne, Switzerland.
 
3.
Chang, T.-C., & Wang, H. (2016). A Multi Criteria Group Decision-making Model for Teacher Evaluation in Higher Education Based on Cloud Model and Decision Tree. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(5), 1243-1262.
 
4.
Garelli, S. (2000). Competitiveness of Nations: the Fundamentals. World Competitiveness Yearbook. pp. 43–49. International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne, Switzerland.
 
5.
Garelli, S. (2003). Competitiveness of Nations: the Fundamentals. The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2003, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 702–713. International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne, Switzerland.
 
6.
Harrison, E. F. (1999). Theory and Policy of International Competitiveness. Westport, Connecticut, London.
 
7.
Hsieh, M.-Y. (2016). Online Learning Era: Exploring the Most Decisive Determinants of MOOCs in Taiwanese Higher Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(5), 1163-1188.
 
8.
Ishikawa, A. (1993). The Max-Min Delphi Method and Fuzzy Delphi Method via Fuzzy Integration. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 55, 241-253.
 
9.
Lin, Y. H. (1998). A Study on The Evaluating Factors of River Basin for The Development of Tourism/Recreation Area (Master’s Thesis), Department of Land Management, Feng Chia University, Taiwan.
 
10.
Murray, T. J., Pipino, L., & Van Gigch, J. P. (1985). A pilot study of fuzzy set modification of Delphi, Human Systems Management, 5, 76-80.
 
11.
Porter, M. E. (2002). Enhancing the Microeconomic Foundations of Prosperity: The Current Competitiveness Index. The Global Competitiveness Report 2001–2002. World Economic Forum. PP. 52–76. Oxford University Press.
 
12.
Yang, M. L., & Hsieh, H. N. (2016). Territory Development Innovation Strategy of the Intelligent Science Park: Developing the Intelligent Park. ICIC Express Letters, Part B: Applications, 7(4), 933-938.
 
13.
Zheng, X. L., & Huang, G. G. (2005). Government-funded innovation activities in industries: the program specialist of Industrial Technology Research Institute as an example. Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, 17(3), 459-489.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215