The dangers of performance-based research funding in non-competitive higher education systems

An increasing number of nations allocate public funds to research institutions on the basis of rankings obtained from national evaluation exercises. Therefore, in non-competitive higher education systems where top scientists are dispersed among all the universities, rather than concentrated among a few, there is a high risk of penalizing those top scientists who work in lower-performance universities. Using a 5 year bibliometric analysis conducted on all Italian universities active in the hard sciences from 2004 to 2008, this work analyzes the distribution of publications and relevant citations by scientists within the universities, measures the research performance of individual scientists, quantifies the intensity of concentration of top scientists at each university, provides performance rankings for the universities, and indicates the effects of selective funding on the top scientists of low-ranked universities.

[1]  Michael Shattock,et al.  Managing successful universities , 2004 .

[2]  W. Glänzel.  Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies , 2008 .

[3]  B. Martin,et al.  University Research Evaluation and Funding: An International Comparison , 2003 .

[4]  Anindya Bhattacharya,et al.  Allocative Efficiency and an Incentive Scheme for Research , 2010 .

[5]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key , 2004, Scientometrics.

[6]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Output-Financing at LUC , 2004, Scientometrics.

[7]  Tindaro Cicero,et al.  The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems , 2012, J. Informetrics.

[8]  米澤 彰純.  評価からみた財政配分とのリンク : 英国Research Assessment Exerciseの発展と危機を中心に(発表・3,大学評価と資源配分,課題研究1,IV 大会報告) , 2007 .

[9]  Dominic Orr,et al.  Performance‐based funding as an instrument of competition in German higher education , 2007 .

[10]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  An International Comparison , 2000 .

[11]  Cristiano Giuffrida,et al.  A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[12]  L. Butler,et al.  Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications—the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts , 2003 .

[13]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  UK Research Assessment Exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity? , 2008, Scientometrics.

[14]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level , 2011, Scientometrics.

[15]  G. Laudel.  The art of getting funded: How scientists adapt to their funding conditions , 2006 .

[16]  Mike Shattock.  Managing modern universities , 2000 .

[17]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Lifting the crown - citation z-score , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[18]  Shaun Goldfinch,et al.  Perils of peer review in a small country? The Performance Based Research Fund in New Zealand , 2012 .

[19]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems , 2004 .

[20]  Mika Nieminen,et al.  University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison , 2010 .

[21]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements , 2008 .

[22]  Stelvia Matos,et al.  Indicators and outcomes of Canadian university research: Proxies becoming goals? , 2006 .

[23]  Franz Strehl,et al.  Funding Systems and their Effects on Higher Education Systems , 2007 .