学术共同体内外的权力博弈与同行评议制度

The conflicts between Academic Community and Peer Review

在学术活动过程中，学者通常要面对来自个体的自主探究权力、源于学术共同体内部的集体权力（如专业或学科的权力）以及来自外部政府和机构的行政权力等相互间的冲突。在这三种基本的权力博弈中，同行评议似乎因其更能体现学术活动的内在逻辑而获得制度优势。但是，由于学术系统内部存在一个等级结构，少数精英往往主宰了学术认可和资源分配的过程。因此，它与其说是最优的路径选择。毋宁说是权宜之计。一个可供考虑的路径选择未必是废弃同行评议制度，而是如何在其制度设计中体现三种权力间结构性的平衡。

In the Process of pursuing for truth， a scholar sometimes is confronted with the conflicts of his own right for freedom of research， the collective power of academic superiors and the administrative forces from the government and institution. Peer review seems to have its own advantage because it embodies the inner logic of academic activities. However， a few elites always dominate the process of academic recognition and the resource distribution due to the existence of a hierarchical structure within academic system. Therefore， an alternative pathway is not to abolish the peer review system but to make a proper balance through the design of the system.