Holistički pristup evaluaciji istraživanja i inovacija: Integracija scijentometrijskih indikatora i otvorene nauke / A Holistic Approach to Research and Innovation Evaluation: Integrating Scientometric Indicators and Open Science

Abstract

In the evolving trends of research and innovation (R&I) performance measurement and impact assessment, the traditional scientometric system – largely relying on quantitative metrics such as h-index and journal impact factors – is increasingly under scrutiny due to its limited capacity to capture a wider spectrum of scientific impact. The emergence of open science challenges traditional paradigms by advocating for more transparent and accessible research processes. Theoretically, this study expands the discourse on scientific impact evaluation by advocating for a broader set of criteria encompassing societal and economic dimensions. Integrating open science principles into research evaluation can provide a more comprehensive view of scientific contributions and enable academic inclusivity, transparency, and societal relevance, in line with the ethos of open science. Conceptually, the study analyzes the coexistence and dynamics between scientometric and open science evaluation systems, exploring their competitive and collaborative relationships. It examines the strengths and weaknesses of each system, revealing that a complete replacement of the scientometric approach by open science is unlikely, nor is there stagnation in their development. The main findings suggest a future where scientometric and open science systems coexist and partially converge, especially in the area of research and innovation outcome evaluation. This convergence heralds a more democratic and inclusive approach to evaluating scientific research. For policymakers and organizers of innovative systems, this study offers insights into possible policies that promote open science practices, developing evaluation metrics that acknowledge diverse scientific contributions, and fostering a research culture that values both scientific rigor and societal engagement. Using an exploratory method based on theoretical concepts and practical insights, this study contributes to more nuanced understanding of changing paradigms in research evaluation.