科技项目专家评审信用管理机制国际比较及对中国制度建设的启示OACHSSCD

Expert reviewer credit management is an important institutional foundation for ensuring the fairness and scientific validity of academic evaluation.With the increasing frequency of academic activities and intensifying research competition,concerns about the integrity of peer reviewers have drawn growing attention.This study analyzes the differences in credit management practices for expert review between China and other countries,focusing on expert selection,credit evaluation,factors influencing review quality,and incentive mechanisms.The findings indicate that,in terms of institutional design,international practices have developed a dynamic credit profiling system that integrates quantitative metrics with qualitative assessments.In recent years,China has established a relatively systematic institutional foundation in the construction of expert databases and the management of negative lists.However,it still faces challenges such as fragmented evaluation standards,lack of transparency in review processes,and weak incentive and accountability mechanisms.At the operational level,many countries have leveraged technological tools and process reengineering to mitigate risks of misconduct in peer review.China places greater emphasis on rigid institutional constraints and full-process supervision during the review process.Meanwhile,China needs to enhance its institutional support in areas such as post-review behavior assessment and dynamic conflict-of-interest monitoring.Based on these insights,the study proposes a triadic framework for expert credit management-comprising institutional refinement,technological empowerment,and cultural cultivation-to promote fairness and rigor in academic peer review and advance the construction of a trustworthy research environment.