{"id":5345,"date":"2022-07-13T17:16:21","date_gmt":"2022-07-13T15:16:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fteval.osulzer.at\/journal\/"},"modified":"2026-08-20T10:26:19","modified_gmt":"2026-08-20T08:26:19","slug":"journal","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/fteval.at\/en\/journal\/","title":{"rendered":"Journal"},"content":{"rendered":"

The fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation<\/h1>\n

The fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation<\/strong> aims to position itself at the interface between research and technology policy practice and academic quality, thereby contributing to the exchange between the various stakeholder groups in the field of RTI evaluation. Thematic issues alternate with thematically open ones. Including the previous newsletters from which the journal emerged, 58 issues have been published so far. The fteval Journal is published as open access. Each article is subject to an editorial review<\/em>. Information for authors<\/strong><\/a> can be found on the following page: https:\/\/fteval.at\/en\/for-authors\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Calls for Papers<\/h2>\n

Issue #59<\/strong> (Publication from 2026) is thematically open<\/strong>. Submission and publication are possible on an ongoing basis.<\/span><\/p>\n

Issue #60<\/strong> (2027) is reserved for the Proceedings of the REvaluation conference 2027. <\/strong>Conference Contributions can be submitted until 21 August 2026<\/strong>. Call link: https:\/\/easychair.org\/cfp\/revaluation2027<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Pilot<\/span><\/span> for<\/span><\/span> open<\/span><\/span> review<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n

Issue<\/span><\/span> #<\/span>59<\/span><\/span>, <\/span>which<\/span><\/span> covers<\/span><\/span> a<\/span><\/span> range<\/span><\/span> of<\/span><\/span> topics<\/span><\/span>, <\/span>will<\/span><\/span> be<\/span><\/span> reviewed<\/span><\/span> as<\/span><\/span> a<\/span><\/span> pilot<\/span><\/span> project<\/span><\/span> using<\/span><\/span> the<\/span><\/span> \u2018<\/span>open<\/span><\/span> peer<\/span><\/span> review<\/span><\/span>\u2019 <\/span>method<\/span><\/span>. <\/span>The<\/span><\/span> process<\/span><\/span> is<\/span><\/span> inspired<\/span><\/span> by<\/span><\/span> the<\/span><\/span> MetaROR<\/span><\/span> network<\/span><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Previous issues<\/h2>\n

All previous issues of the fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation can be accessed here: Previous issues<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Current issues<\/h2>\n

Issue #58<\/strong> is a special issue jointly created with FORWIT about science for policy<\/strong>, advisory councils and evaluation, with Rupert Pichler (BMIMI) and Thomas K\u00f6nig (FORWIT) as co-editors:<\/p>\n<\/div>

\r\n

Table of Contents<\/h2>\r\n\r\n
    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n
  1. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Editorial: Science, Policy, and Advice. Lasting Tensions in a Symbiotic Relationship<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Pichler, Rupert, K\u00f6nig, Thomas, Buntfu\u00df, Paul, Wagner, Isabella <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 7-28 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  2. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n A Brief History of Science and Research Policy Advisory Councils in Austria<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Pichler, Rupert <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 30-55 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  3. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Independent Advice in Research and Innovation Policy: The Role of the Spanish Science, Technology and Innovation Advisory Council (CACTI)<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Banda, Enric, Sanz-Men\u00e9ndez, Luis <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 56-81 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  4. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Evidence-Based Policy Advice? The German Council of Science and Humanities<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Heinze, Thomas, Jappe, Arlette <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 82-104 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  5. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Quality Management in Science Advice. A Practice Report<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Buntfu\u00df, Paul, K\u00f6nig, Thomas <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 105-123 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  6. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Science for Policy in Austria - A Survey of Expert Councils and Their Areas of Responsibility<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Fa\u00dfmann, Heinz <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 125-147 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  7. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n The Servant of Two Masters. Scientific Policy Advice: The Establishment of a National Scientific Advisory Network in Switzerland - A Field Report.<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Zollinger, Lukas <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 148-175 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  8. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Knowledge for Place-Based Policymaking: Towards Interactive Science-For-Policy Ecosystems<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Wise, Emily, Wilson, James, Schwaag Serger, Sylvia <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 176-209 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  9. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Science, Technology and Innovation Policymaking, Advice and Evaluation Capabilities in Post-Apartheid South Africa: An Assessment<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Kahn, Michael, Ralphs, Gerard, Mustapha, Nazeem, Borel-Saladin, Jacqueline <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 210-252 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n
  10. \r\n\r\n
    \r\n The Evolution of Scientific Advice in EU Institutions.<\/strong> <\/i><\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n \r\n
    \r\n Allegra, Alessandro <\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n
    \r\n Pages: 253-278 <\/div>\r\n \r\n <\/li>\r\n\r\n \r\n <\/ol>\r\n\r\n \n<\/div>

    How much independence does scientific policy advice need \u2013 and how much can it afford? When does evidence become a political argument, and when does expertise remain without consequence? This special issue brings together contributions from Austria, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, South Africa and the EU that get to the bottom of these questions \u2013 historically, institutionally and systemically. At its centre are advisory councils and evaluation systems: their origins, their evolution, and their often contradictory roles at the interface of science and politics. The findings are as sobering as they are illuminating: neither maximum autonomy nor close alignment with the political process guarantees impact. What remains is the need to continuously recalibrate this balance \u2013 and that is precisely what this issue sets out to explore.<\/p>\n

    The special issue #58 - Governing with Evidence. Councils, Advisory Sytems, and Evaluation <\/strong> was created together with the FORWIT and co-edited by Rupert Pichler and Thomas K\u00f6nig. Thank you very much for this cooperation!<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

    • \n\n