1. Introduction
The present study started with the recognition that the science and technology (S&T) policy studies in Korea, which has long been developed by focusing on the practical aspects, has failed to establish its academic theoretical systems due to the lack of an independent intelligent structure. The S&T policy studies has grown into an applied science and an interdisciplinary field with social sciences in the background. Therefore, if the S&T policy studies in Korea fails to develop into a research field that reflects the distinct characteristics of the Korean society, the studies may return to one of the basic sciences that have been employed by the studies itself for application.
The purpose of this study is to explore the intellectual structure of the S&T policy studies in Korea and estimate the degree of establishment of its academic identity. The findings will provide theoretical and institutional implications for the continuous development of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an independent academic discipline.
2. Research design for analyzing the intellectual structure
This study was designed as a mixed methods research to explore the academic identity of the S&T policy studies in Korea, as a pragmatic attempt to explain research questions more comprehensively and completely. Citation analysis based on a bibliometric approach was performed as a quantitative research, and it was complementarily combined with in-depth interviews conducted as a qualitative research according to the explanatory design.
The first step of the analysis was to perform author bibliography coupling analysis (ABCA) and author co-citation analysis (ACCA), which are bibliometric methodologies based on Kuhn's discussion of normal sciences, to explore the main research areas of the S&T policy studies in Korea and identify the academic disciplines that provide theoretical background to the S&T policy studies. In the second step, in-depth interviews were conducted with key researchers in the academic community based on the results from the empirical analysis performed in the first stage. Since the experts in this field understand the context of the development process of the S&T policy studies in Korea, the interviews allowed for analytically interpreting the results obtained from the analysis in the first stage that explained merely the current state. In addition, this also allowed for drawing the implications for the future development of the S&T policy studies in Korea.
3. Intellectual Structure of the Science and Technology Policy Studies in Korea
The analytical results can be summarized as follows according to the research questions. First, in terms of the contents of the knowledge, the most intensively studied research areas of the studies were found to be 'technology innovation' and 'R&D management.' Although the other two areas, 'policy process of S&T' and 'public management of S&T,' are studied, their proportions were relatively small. Even within each research area, the proportions were significantly different among the sub-categories. For example, in the research area of 'technology innovation,' the proportion of the theoretical research on the concept or types of technology innovation was low, while the proportion of case studies was high. The research areas of 'R&D management' and 'policy process of S&T' were centered on the evaluation. Finally, the research area of 'public management of S&T' was focused on the traditional public management. Therefore, the analytical results showed that the growth of the S&T policy studies in Korea has been centered on a few particular research areas, and the studies in the sub-categories have been severely biased so that some of the sub-categories have been rarely studied.
Second, in terms of knowledge production, an analysis was performed to identify disciplinary backgrounds that take the lead in each research area of the S&T policy studies in Korea. The analytical results showed that business administration, economics and policy sciences have led the studies throughout the research areas. In particular, the studies in 'technology innovation' and 'R&D management' have been led by business administration and economics, while the 'policy process of S&T' by policy sciences.
Third, in terms of knowledge production, an analysis was performed to identify the related academic disciplines that most affect each research area of the S&T policy studies in Korea and provide the theoretical basis. According to the analysis results, it turned out that there is no significant difference between the related disciplines that provide the theoretical basis to the S&T policy studies in Korea and the background disciplines that lead studies in the research areas.
Therefore, the results showed that a few specific academic disciplines such as business administration, economics, and policy sciences tend to lead the overall research on the S&T policy studies in Korea. Business administration and economics may have provided the theoretical basis for policy establishment, and policy sciences may have provided the procedural knowledge to make policies by using the theories. However, the S&T policy studies in Korea has been affected more by business administration and economics than policy sciences, probably because the research on technology innovation started from business administration, and the science and technology policies have been developed as a tool for the national economic development in Korea.
4. Conclusions
These findings showed that the S&T policy studies in Korea is simply a multidisciplinary collection of academic results produced by researchers from various disciplinary backgrounds. It was also found that convergence of various research contents and methodologies is not occurring, because business administration and economics have been playing the leading roles in most of the research areas. Therefore, the S&T policy studies in Korea is still considered as a multidisciplinary research focused on economics, business administration, and policy sciences, not a substantial interdisciplinary research, and its academic identity as an independent discipline would hardly be established under the current conditions. Hence, this research provided suggestions to make continuous growth in the S&T policy studies in Korea according to its level of institutional development.
Various implications were derived from the present study for the future development of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an interdisciplinary academic field, but this study has several limitations. Further studies may need to be conducted by broadening the research scope and subject to explore the entire range of the S&T policy studies in Korea or to develop a general theory that can include the S&T policy studies in both Korea and other countries. Despite these limitations, this study is significant as the first attempt to identify the intellectual structure of the S&T policy studies in Korea from the perspective of interdisciplinarity. This study could be expected to be the starting point for establishing the academic identity of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an independent discipline.