Could the generalized adoption of the COARA principles make administrative research evaluation socially desirable and solve all its problems? The answer to this question is no. To reach this conclusion, two main arguments are discussed. The first characterises COARA as a form of 'technocracy' perfectly consistent with a neo-liberal view of research. The second consists in the adoption of Philip Kitcher's idea of well-ordered science. It is argued that administrative evaluation of research, even if correct on the basis of COARA principles, is at odds with the principles of well-ordered science since it cannot escape neither the tyranny of expertise nor the tyranny of ignorance. These two arguments allow to suggest limiting administrative evaluation to the bare minimum (recruitment of researchers and funding of projects), and to focus attention mainly to the fairness of evaluation procedures.

翻译：COARA原则的广泛采纳能否使行政研究评估在社会层面变得可取并解决其所有问题？对此问题的答案是否定的。为得出这一结论，本文讨论了两个主要论点。首先，本文将COARA定性为一种与新自由主义研究观完全契合的“技术官僚主义”形式。其次，本文采纳了菲利普·基彻关于“良序科学”的理念。研究认为，即便基于COARA原则的行政研究评估在技术上是正确的，它仍与良序科学的原则相悖，因为它既无法摆脱专家专制的桎梏，也无法避免无知专制的困境。基于这两点论证，本文建议将行政评估限制在最低必要范围（研究人员聘用与项目资助），并将关注重点主要转向评估程序的公正性。