본 연구는 국책연구기관 연구윤리평가를 둘러싼 주요 쟁점들에 관해 고찰한 결과 다음과 같은 결론을 도출하였다.
첫째, 국책연구기관 연구보고서에 요구되는 연구윤리 중 가장 중요한 것은 위조, 변조, 표절, 중복게재, 부당한 저자 표시 등의 연구부정행위를 하지 않는 것이며, 현재 표절과 중복게재가 가장 심각한 문제임이 확인되었다. 둘째, 연구윤리를 확립하기 위한 수단으로 연구윤리평가를 이용하는 것은 긍·부정적 양면이 있으므로 신중하게 접근해야 한다. 현재와 같은 사전적 연구윤리평가방식은 여러 논란의 빌미를 제공하는 등 부정적 측면이 강하므로 재검토가 필요하다. 셋째, 현행 연구윤리평가를 지속하더라도 평가의 근거를 비롯하여 목적, 기준, 방법, 결과활용 등에 관해 개선할 점이 많다. 평가의 전 과정에서 국책연구기관의 특성이 고려되어야 하고, 평가 근거 및 목적의 명확화, 평가기준 보완 및 구체화, 표절검색시스템 구축 등 평가방법 개선, 그리고 평가결과 활용 범위 재조정 등이 필요한 것으로 나타났다.
This research has been carried out through exploring controversial issues regarding currently running research ethics evaluation system for national policy research institutes in Korea and concluded as follows. First, the primary research ethics required in reports of the national policy research institutes must be not performing fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, and inappropriate authorship. And it has been proved plagiarism and redundant publication are highly problematic. Second, utilizing evaluation for consolidating research ethics should be approached cautiously as there are both aspects of strength and weakness. The priori research ethics evaluation system currently used should be reconsidered as it has the negative aspect including providing the reason for political debate. Third, while we continue to evaluate the research ethics, efforts should be made to improve the system. Clarification of the basis and purpose, supplementation and actualization of evaluating standard, establishment of the ‘plagiarism search system' will be conducive to improvement of the system. In addition, the characteristics of the national policy research institutes must be considered through the whole process of evaluation. Adjusting the scope of utilization is also necessary aspect to be considered.
This research has been carried out through exploring controversial issues regarding currently running research ethics evaluation system for national policy research institutes in Korea and concluded as follows. First, the primary research ethics required in reports of the national policy research institutes must be not performing fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, and inappropriate authorship. And it has been proved plagiarism and redundant publication are highly problematic. Second, utilizing evaluation for consolidating research ethics should be approached cautiously as there are both aspects of strength and weakness. The priori research ethics evaluation system currently used should be reconsidered as it has the negative aspect including providing the reason for political debate. Third, while we continue to evaluate the research ethics, efforts should be made to improve the system. Clarification of the basis and purpose, supplementation and actualization of evaluating standard, establishment of the ‘plagiarism search system' will be conducive to improvement of the system. In addition, the characteristics of the national policy research institutes must be considered through the whole process of evaluation. Adjusting the scope of utilization is also necessary aspect to be considered.
