Allocative efficiency in public research funding: Can bibliometrics help?

被引:103
作者
Abramo, Giovanni [1 ]
D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea [1 ]
Caprasecca, Alessandro [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Sch Engn, Dept Management, Lab Studies Res & Technol Transfer, Rome, Italy
关键词
Research assessment; Universities; Peer review; Bibliometrics; IMPACT-FACTORS; INDICATORS; UNIVERSITIES; PERFORMANCE; CITATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.001
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The use of outcome control modes of research evaluation exercises is ever more frequent. They are conceived as tools to stimulate increased levels of research productivity, and to guide choices in allocating components of government research budgets for publicly funded institutions. There are several contributions in the literature that compare the different methodological approaches that policy makers could adopt for these exercises, however the comparisons are limited to only a few disciplines. This work, examining the case of the whole of the "hard sciences" of the Italian academic system, makes a comparison between results obtained from peer review type of evaluations (as adopted by the Ministry of Universities and Research) and those possible from a bibliometric approach (as developed by the authors). The aim is to understand to what extent bibliometric methodology, which is noted as relatively inexpensive, time-saving and exhaustive, can complement and integrate peer review methodology in research evaluation. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:206 / 215
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
ABRAMO G, 2006, NON TUTTO QUELLO LUC
[2]   The measurement of Italian universities' research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology [J].
Abramo, Giovanni ;
D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea ;
Pugini, Fabio .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2008, 76 (02) :225-244
[3]  
Abramo G, 2007, CURR SCI INDIA, V93, P762
[4]   Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university [J].
Aksnes, DW ;
Taxt, RE .
RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2004, 13 (01) :33-41
[5]  
[Anonymous], VTR 2001 2003 RIS VA
[6]  
GEORGHIOU L, 2005, BERL INT WORKSH EV P
[7]   THE PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS OF PEER-REVIEW AND THE SUPPRESSION OF INNOVATION [J].
HORROBIN, DF .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (10) :1438-1441
[8]   Validation of bibliometric indicators in the field of mathematics [J].
Korevaar, JC ;
Moed, HF .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 1996, 37 (01) :117-130
[9]   The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research [J].
Martin, BR .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 1996, 36 (03) :343-362
[10]   Impact factors can mislead [J].
Moed, HF ;
vanLeeuwen, TN .
NATURE, 1996, 381 (6579) :186-186