대한토목학회논문집 (KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research)

  • 제35권6호
  • /
  • Pages.1395-1404
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1015-6348(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2799-9629(eISSN)
대한토목학회 (Korean Society of Civil Engeneers)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

도로교통 기술수준 평가

Comparative Assessment of Transportation Technology

  • 김태영 (한국건설기술연구원 건설정책연구소) ;
  • 박희성 (국립한밭대학교 건설환경공학과)
  • 투고 : 2015.05.27
  • 심사 : 2015.09.25
  • 발행 : 2015.12.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 도로교통분야 기술수준의 정량적인 평가와 기술개발, 국토교통 R&D의 전략적 방향 모색 및 기술정책 수립 등 수요에 대응할 수 있는 기초자료 제공을 목적으로 수행하였다. 이를 위해 도로교통분야의 기술 분류체계를 구축하고 기술별 핵심 키워드를 도출하여 한국, 미국, 일본, 독일, 프랑스, 영국의 기술수준 조사를 실시하였다. 기술수준 평가결과 미국이 모든 기술분야에서 최상의 특허 및 논문기술경쟁력을 보유한 것으로 나타났다. 한국의 경우 전반적으로 중상위권의 기술경쟁력을 보유한 것으로 나타났으나, 기술별 편차가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구결과는 향후 도로교통분야 기술개발 및 계획수립 시 기초자료로 활용될 수 있다.

This paper provides information for quantitative evaluation of transportation technology, technology development, and transportation R&D and construction engineering policy agenda. Technology classification structure and key words were established and survey was performed to identify key words of technology for transportation. Then, competitiveness of patents and journal articles is evaluated for Korea, USA, Japan, Germany, France, and England. As a result, USA is the most competitive country for all technology categories based on patents and journal articles. Korea is grouped in upper-middle class for overall transportation technology level. However, there are some variances among the level of technologies. The results of this research can be utilized to establish a road map for transportation R&D and plans.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Go, H. S., Jeon, S. B., Park, G. J., Park, Y. S. and Hong, H. E. (2011). Understanding and practice of defense technology level survey, Hyungseul Publishing Network (in Korean).
  2. Han, M. K., Kim, B. S., Pyu, J. Y. and Byeon, S. C. (2010). "Technology level evaluation based on technology growth model and its implication - In Case of Biochip and Biosensor Technology." Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, Korea Technology Innovation Society, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 252-281.
  3. Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement (KAIA) (2013). 2013 Infrastructure technology level evaluation report (in Korean).
  4. Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) (1998). Study on the technology level assessment technique developed (in Korean).
  5. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) (2011). 2011 Korea IT technological competitiveness analysis reports for using scientometric (papers and patents) (in Korean).
  6. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) (2013). Industrial technology level evaluation (in Korean).
  7. Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KICT) (2013). National contribution of construction industry and technology level of main infrastructure in Korea, KICT 2013-279 (in Korean).
  8. Lee, D., Hong, S. and Kim, Y. (2014). "Domestic and oversea research trend analysis for technology level evaluation and assessment." iCROS, Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems, Korea, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 24-27 (in Korean).
  9. Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A. and Taranta, S. (2005). Tools for composite indicators building, EUR 21682EN, Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen, JRC Ispra, Italy
  10. RAND Corporation (2008). U.S. competitiveness in science and technology, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.
  11. Yumiko, K., Ayaka, S., Masatsura, I. and Hiroyuki, T. (2012). Science and technology indicators 2011, National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP), Japan.