This article is a critical review that clarifies the structural aporia involved in the evaluation of Science and Technology policies and research evaluation from the perspective of evaluation studies, not technology management. The complexity and ambiguity of the evaluation of Science and Technology policies can be elucidated by（1）the domain expansion of science, technology, and innovation policies,（2）the structure of Science, Technology and Society and evaluation conclusions implemented in each sector autonomously, and（3）the diversity and comprehensiveness of evaluation methodologies utilized for Research Evaluation. The multiple motivations of evaluation utilization within stakeholders in the policy process and the‘non-financeability’of the benefits derived from science and technology impede the enhancement of evidence-based policy making and research evaluation in Science and Technology policy.

  Following the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident, the Japanese Government stipulated that large electricity companies, which possessed nuclear power plants, would have to pay money to help Tokyo Electric Power Company with compensation claims. In 2016, the Japanese Government decided additionally that these large electricity companies could collect money for compensation by charging other small electricity companies for the use of main power lines. However, within the Policy Affairs Research Council of the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan（LDP）, it was decided that large electricity companies should rationalize the way they spend money and pass on the money saved through rationalization to the compensation.

  In this paper, this political process of the Japanese Government and the LDP was analyzed with the method of sociological functional analysis. Through the analysis, it was observed that this modification of Japanese nuclear compensation system was connected not only to the policy on electricity charges but also to the reconstruction policy of Fukushima. This means that some part of the Japanese policy making process was connected with the demands from other various policies. This study shows the possibility of applying the sociological functional analysis to the evaluation of policy making process.

  Among the evaluating of the evaluating agencies activities in Japanese Government, Research and Development (R & D) is particularly difficult. This paper addresses the question of why the evaluating of R & D is difficult.

  First, based on the conduct and evaluating of R & D in science and technology policy, the relationship with other adjacent system, Japanese Policy Evaluation System (under Government Policy Evaluations Act, Act No. 86 of June 29, 2001), project review (since 2009), and performance measurement of the Incorporated Administrative Agencies. What is clear from this discussion is that there is confusion between the various systems and that the “concept of evaluation” is not so clear.

  The effectiveness debate is the biggest subject in the evaluating of R & D. This paper will emphasize the distinction between “top-down approach” and “bottom-up approach” in R & D and the difference between the terms of “technology assessment” and “evaluation”.

  The conclusion of this paper is the ambiguity of the evaluation concept.

  The newly institutionalized National Research and Development Agency (NRDA) aims to maximize research and development outcomes from the longer-term performance perspective to research and development. On the other hand, general-performance unspecified NRDA is based on conventional objectives management. This paper examined how the evaluation of the NRDA system is constructed after the system reform and the changes in the system of objectives management inherent in evaluation through a comparison between the (unspecified) NRDA and the Specified NRDA. There were three findings in terms of both NRDAs. First, in terms of five to seven years of mid- and long-term goal-setting, the long-term orientation is not necessarily observed. Second, the changes in the mission are seen following generally the government’s policy and trend. Third, it can be inferred that management efficiency is aimed while securing necessary human labor budgets.

  This paper analyzes the results of a questionnaire about research evaluations at the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) Research and Development Directorate. Regarding research evaluations, various problems, such as pressure about the original research due to the burden of evaluation, have arisen. Through this questionnaire, we tried to clarify what kind of perceptions staff members have about research evaluations. It presents options regarding the purpose, necessity, effect, amount of materials, budget scale, working scale, and important points of research evaluations. This questionnaire’s results revealed various issues, such as the diverse purposes of research evaluation and the lack of any evaluation policies. To solve these problems, the organization needs to improve the staff’s evaluation literacy and carry out more strategic evaluations by clarifying the evaluation policies.

  This paper aimed to examine how to achieve better policy evaluation regarding science, technology, and innovation (STI) considering the case of France. The paper consists of three parts, as presented below: (1) President Charles de Gaulle firstly set up an advisory body in his administration to monitor the STI policy and advise decision-makers. The policy evaluation system was established in the 1980s under a new left party government. (2) There were some trials and errors until the 1990s to make policy evaluations more robust and credible by using bottom-up, redundant, and proactive monitoring, and considering the interaction between the evaluation and the resource management of researchers and research units. (3) With a need for a national STI policy strategy development, what followed was the establishment of an integrated evaluation body (Le Haut Conseil de l’évaluation de la recherche et de l’enseignement supérieur) and a supervising body (Le Conseil stratégique de la recherche). In conclusion, policy evaluation can be improved through an integrated discussion on the aim (i.e. economic impact assessment), processes (i.e. linkage with government funding), and institutional placement (i.e. independence) of monitoring and advice (i.e. organisations).

  ILC (International Linear Collider) is an international collaboration project which is designed to find out what happened at the beginning of the universe. On the other hand, ILC project is a central core of several projects for regional development in Iwate prefecture. However, this kind of regional development has been criticized as inappropriate from the perspective of autonomy.

  This article describes the structure of the problems that occurred at the contact point between a large-scale research and development and a regional development. This structure is identified by explanation of some projects and discourses of relevant bodies (central government, Iwate prefecture, and scientists) with reference to a history of regional development in Japan, spontaneous development theory, concepts of dependence and independence, and framing in the policy process. This article also focuses on a confusion of accountabilities caused by that structure.

  The promotion of evidence-based policy making (EBPM) in administrative project review is intended to examine projects by creating a logic model. Some people think that this is not in line with the main purpose of EBPM as no experiments and advanced statistical analysis are conducted in this regard. However, such a view is problematic in that it does not take into account the characteristics and purpose of administrative project review. This paper clarifies the position of administrative project review and examines the case of administrative project review in 2019. The results reveal that the challenges of administrative project review are that (1) it is influenced by external experts' awareness of the issues and (2) its intended impact includes "policy" and "program." While presenting these issues, this paper emphasizes the importance of the educational and awareness-raising effects of administrative project reviews by leveraging their characteristics and sharing their roles with other approaches.

The worldwide investment needed to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030 is approximately $5 trillion to $7 trillion per year. Impact Investments are approaches to mobilise more private finance toward the achievement of SDGs. Now, the convergence of Impact Measurement Methods (IMMs) for Impact Investments represents a central challenge for the development of the market. To reveal divergences and offer suggestions for overcoming the challenge, this article conducted a comparative analysis of the 25 IMMs commonly used by impact investors, based on the surveys by Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) in 2017 and 2019. As a result, the analysis revealed divergences among the 25 IMMs that could result in different measurement results, and it categorised the IMMs into three groups of Reporting Standard, Performance Rating and Project Evaluation. Based on the analysis, this article further provided a guidance to select IMMs and concluded that research toward the convergence of ESG evaluations is of prime importance.

  The purpose of this paper is to comprehend how evaluation practices have been managed and controlled by administrative organizations from the perspectives of public administration. This paper focuses on the evaluation policy and considers the administrative processes of the ODA evaluation. Evaluation policies share ideas about evaluation and enable the organizations to evaluate systematically and coherently. The author traced the historical changes of Japan’s ODA Evaluation Guidelines, which have been updated 12 times from 2003 to 2020. As a result, this research reveals that the guidelines have been modified incrementally to adapt and coordinate internal and external conditions, such as organizational arrangements, changes of policies and programs, international trends or movements, and interactions between scholars and practitioners. In addition, the accumulation of minor changes is treated as precedents and yields both improvements and deteriorations of the practices. Consequently, the guidelines tend to be misused as manuals and confuse the evaluation practices.

  The purpose of this paper is to examine critical components and issues in a career education programs which is planned and managed by the association of parents of children with developmental disorders. Not only students but also their parents participated in the program, and the program was positioned as a place to support both the students and their parents. We extracted the following critical components: promotion of dialogue about career choices, deepening of self-understanding through awareness of strengths and weaknesses, and deepening of understanding of work through experience of comparing one’s job with one’s characteristics. On the other hand, issues identified included improving the linkage between the content of the program and career education in schools, and procuring manpower to reduce the burden on parents to manage the program.