ln our study we tried to make a comprehensive analysis of the development and evaluation procedures in scientific research activity, since the establishment of the independent state of Slovenia till today. In the first part of the study we focused on the issues related to human resources and funding capacities for research activities in Slovenia; in the second part, we focused on scientific production of program research groups in the selected fields inc1uding natural science, medicine and biotechnology. We tried to highlight both the input in research activity and the scientific production, measured in tenns of publications in periodic scientific journals; along with this, we also tried to make comparisons in the international context, especially within the framework of the EU. Presentations of funding research activities from public resources and of research potentials in Slovenia show relatively significant differences between scientific disciplines and the research fields. The extent of research potentials and funds for scientific research work as well as their distribution are largely the result of development of science and the science policy in Slovenia in the past sixty years. As expected, there are also visible differences in scientific production and the impact of research results. In that part of the research where we studi ed in detail the results of program research groups in the selected research fields, we tried to determine the scope of scientific production, and - using excellence (impact) indicators - its quality. We set the hypothesis that the papers of Slovenian researchers in SCI-indexed journals, published in high ranking journals, are better cited than papers published in other journals. We also expected that international co-authorship of Slovenian researchers strongly inf1uenced the impact of scientific papers. The results obtained have not wholly confirmed the initial hypotheses. The result has been shown to be significantly inf1uenced, especially by the development of individual research fields in the country. We also compared the results/outcomes obtained through quantitative measurement and peer review of research results, and confirmed the hypothesis that by using qualitative evaluation based on international reviews with less conf1ict of interests, there is higher correlation between the two methods of measurement/evaluation.