Location of Repository

World-leading research and its measurement

By Andrew J. Oswald

Abstract

Journalists and others have asked me whether the favourable RAE 2008 results for UK economics are believable. This is a fair question. It also opens up a broader and more important one: how can we design a bibliometric method to assess the quality (rather than merely quantity) of a nation’s science? To try to address this, I examine objective data on the world’s most influential economics articles. I find that the United Kingdom performed reasonably well over the 2001-2008 period. Of 450 genuinely world-leading journal articles, the UK produced 10% of them -- and was the source of the most-cited article in each of the Journal of Econometrics, the International Economic Review, the Journal of Public Economics, and the Rand Journal of Economics, and of the second most-cited article in the Journal of Health Economics. Interestingly, more than a quarter of these world-leading UK articles came from outside the best-known half-dozen departments. Thus the modern emphasis on ‘top’ departments and the idea that funding should be concentrated in a few places may be mistaken. Pluralism may help to foster iconoclastic ideas

Topics: LB2300
Publisher: University of Warwick, Department of Economics
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1330

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1996). A citation-based test for discrimination at economics and finance journals. Working paper, doi
  2. (2009). An assessment of British science over the 20 th century. doi
  3. (2007). An examination of the reliability of prestigious scholarly journals: Evidence and implications for decision-makers. doi
  4. (2007). Be known by the company you keep: Citations - quality or chance?
  5. (2008). Comparing the early research performance of PhD graduates doi
  6. (2008). Down-shifting among top UK scientists? The decline of revolutionary science and the rise of normal science. doi
  7. (2005). Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact.
  8. (2007). Evaluating the performance of UK research in economics. Report sponsored by the Royal Economic Society.
  9. (2005). How much better are the most prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication. doi
  10. (2007). Is peer review in decline? Working paper, doi
  11. (2003). Publishing as prostitution? Choosing between one’s own ideas and academic success. doi
  12. (2007). Recent publishing trends at the AER, JPE, and QJE. doi
  13. (2006). Research and higher education in economics: Can we deliver the Lisbon objectives? doi
  14. (2007). Ring a ring o’ roses: Quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies. doi
  15. (1982). Scholarship, citations and salaries: Economic rewards in economics. doi
  16. (2006). Should research universities be led by top researchers, and are they? A citations analysis. doi
  17. (2009). Socrates in the boardroom: Why research universities should be led by top scholars. doi
  18. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. doi
  19. (1995). The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise Ratings for British library and information science university departments. doi
  20. (2003). The determinants of Econometric Society fellows elections. doi
  21. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. doi
  22. (2000). UK economics and the future supply of academic economists. doi
  23. (2007). Unbiased peer review and the averaging fallacy. Working paper,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.