Clevers J C
Hubrecht Laboratorium KNAW, Nederlands Instituut voor Ontwikkelingsbiologie, Postbus 85.164, 3584 CT, Utrecht.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005 Jul 16;149(29):1608-11.
Biomedical science in the Netherlands and other continental European countries is lagging behind scientific research in English-speaking countries. A comparison between the two systems reveals several crucial differences. Although levels of government funding of scientific research are approximately equal, the rigid, non-quality-based funding system of continental universities compares badly with the flexible quality-based funding systems in the USA and the U.K. The rigid, hierarchical organisation and indistinct career structure that are found in the continental European system lead to problems in funding strategy and a lack of independence among young researchers. Moreover, equalized funding by national governments to state universities has hampered the creation of centres of excellence. It is proposed that the broad introduction of a peer-review-based funding system would solve these problems and would put European science back on its feet.
荷兰及其他欧洲大陆国家的生物医学科学落后于英语国家的科研水平。对这两种体系的比较揭示了几个关键差异。尽管政府对科研的资助水平大致相当，但欧洲大陆大学僵化的、非基于质量的资助体系与美国和英国灵活的基于质量的资助体系相比，显得很糟糕。欧洲大陆体系中僵化的等级组织和不清晰的职业结构导致了资助策略方面的问题以及年轻研究人员缺乏独立性。此外，各国政府对国立大学的均等资助阻碍了卓越中心的创建。有人提议，广泛引入基于同行评议的资助体系将解决这些问题，并使欧洲科学重新站稳脚跟。
