The basic concept for the democracy ranking of the quality of democracy

"The following paper presents the basic concept for the Democracy Ranking of the Quality of Democracy and positions this approach in context of academic discourses about democracy and the quality of democracy. Key dimensions of democracy are freedom, equality and control. Quality-of-democracy models commonly emphasize a democracy understanding that is broader than earlier concepts of primarily electoral democracies. Different global democracy and democratization measurement initiatives (Freedom House, Polity IV, Vanhanen’s Index of Democracy, and the Economist Intelligence Unit's Index of Democracy) are reviewed and compared. The Democracy Ranking underscores a conceptualization of the Quality of Democracy = Quality of Politics + Quality of Society. The conceptual formula for the Democracy Ranking (see Figure 5 in Chapter 5), therefore, may be summarized as: quality of democracy = (freedom + other characteristics of the political system) + (performance of the nonpolitical dimensions). This formula offers an opportunity for creating regularly conducted indicator-based rankings of countries, based on the quality of their democracy." (author's abstract

Evaluating academic research in Germany: patterns and policies

In this country study of Germany the patterns and policies of academic research as well as the evaluation of academic research are analyzed, through applying the following approach: first of all, a bibliometric survey is carried out that investigates the publication output and publication efficiency of Germany’s academic research within international journals; we further investigate whether the results of a bibliometric survey appear compatible with the performance of other indicators. Secondly, discourse and policies of the evaluation of Germany’s university research are investigated by addressing issues such as: the current situation; the structural and cultural constraints against evaluations; the general reasons why evaluations of university research will play an increasingly important role in the future; and an overview of specific evaluation initiatives. Thirdly and finally, also the discourse and policies of the evaluation of Germany’s university-related research are examined. [author's abstract

Wie links oder wie rechts sind Österreichs Länder? Eine komparative Langzeitanalyse des parlamentarischen Mehrebenensystems Österreichs (1945-2007)

'Der Artikel befasst sich mit politischen Links-rechts-Schwingungen in Österreichs parlamentarischem Mehrebenensystem im Zeitraum 1945-2007, wofür eine bestimmte Messmethode für Parlamentsindizes verwendet wird. Im Zentrum steht eine vergleichende Betrachtung der neun Länderparlamente, wobei auch Wechselwirkungen zur nationalen Ebene (Nationalrat) und zur supranationalen Ebene (Europäisches Parlament) untersucht werden. Empirisch lässt sich seit 2000 eine deutliche Zunahme der politischen Links-rechts-Schwingungen auf Österreichs Länderebene beobachten. Dafür werden folgende Thesen zur Diskussion gestellt: Erstens das Abtragen rechter (konservativer) Langzeithegemonien auf Landesebene; zweitens nehmen Trends auf Landesebene teilweise spätere Trends auf Bundesebene vorweg; drittens sind die politischen Trends auf Landesebene teilweise gegenläufig ('anti-zyklisch') zum Bundestrend.' (Autorenreferat)'The article focuses on political left-right swings in the Austrian parliamentary multi-level system during the period 1945-2007, applying a specific method or measurement for parliamentary indices. Key is the comparative assessment of the parliaments of the nine provinces, whereby also interactions are being analyzed with the national level ('Nationalrat', the lower house) and the supranational level (European Parliament). Since 2000, the authors observe empirically a crucial increase of political left-right swings at the Austrian provincial level. For that they propose the following hypotheses: first, the erosion of right (conservative) hegemony at the provincial level; second, trends at the provincial level partially anticipate later trends at the federal level; third, political trends at the provincial level act partially contrary ('anti-cyclically') to federal trends.' (author's abstract)

Politische Steuerung über öffentliche Förderung universitärer Forschung? Systemtheoretische Überlegungen zu Forschungs- und Technologiepolitik

'Über Forschungs- und Technologiepolitik, im Besonderen über die öffentliche Förderung universitärer Forschung, kann Politik steuernd auf das Wissenschaftssystem einwirken. Der Politik stehen dafür zumindest zwei Steuerungsoptionen zur Verfügung: 1) Allokation und Reallokation (öffentlicher) Ressourcen sowie 2) politische Überzeugungsarbeit durch Kommunikation und Anreizsetzung. Ein Ziel der Eigenrationalität des Wissenschaftssystems liegt in der Hervorbringung universitärer Forschung von hoher Qualität und Effektivität: Systemtheoretisch gesprochen ist politische Steuerung dann erfolgreich, wenn sie die Qualität und Effektivität universitärer Forschung unterstützt. Dabei muss die Politik aber auch die Autonomie des Wissenschaftssystems respektieren.' (Autorenreferat)'Politics can influence the science system through the application of research and technology policy, in particular through public support of university research. Politics may draw on at least two 'steering' mechanisms: first, the allocation and reallocation of (public) resources; and second, a balanced political persuasion through communication and the implementation of a specific set of incentives. One goal of the rationale of the science system is to produce high quality and effective university research: according to systems theory, political steering is successful if it enhances the quality and effectiveness of university research. At the same time, politics must always respect the autonomy of the science system.' (author's abstract

Comparison of Evaluation of Research and Teaching at Universities in Europe: Country Groups in Evaluation in Higher Education Systems?

The analysis is guided by the following research question: Based on the self-perception of academic faculty (academic staff) of the evaluation of research and teaching at universities, which groups of countries do emerge or may be indicated for further exploration? The basic idea is to create a comparison of evaluation at universities (in higher education systems) in Europe, and by using this approach to suggest, which countries (national higher education systems) are more similar or less similar to each other. Evaluation is linked to NPM (New Public Management) governance, network governance, and consequences and feedback of evaluation. The article wants to contribute to the discussion, which organizational changes and developments are occurring at the higher education system level with regard to quality assurance and quality enhancement. 22.03.2013 | David F. J. Campbell (Vienna

Nationale Forschungssysteme im Vergleich: Strukturen, Herausforderungen und Entwicklungsoptionen

'Den konzeptionellen Rahmen des gegenständlichen Beitrages bilden Überlegungen zur Bedeutung der Wissensbasis für Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft und das Konzept des 'Wissensstaates', der die Bedingungen der Wissensbasis reflektiert und durch Politik entsprechend zu fördern versucht. Die Analyse beschäftigt sich vor diesem Hintergrund aus international vergleichender Perspektive mit Strukturen, Herausforderungen und Entwicklungsoptionen nationaler (bzw. national aggregierter) Forschungssysteme und operationalisiert zentrale einschlägige Fragestellungen und Problemzusammenhänge an Hand von quantitativen Indikatoren. Als Forschungssysteme werden dabei die EU, die USA und Japan differenziert. Die Indikatoren, die zu ihrer Analyse herangezogen werden, sind auf unterschiedlicher Ebene angesiedelt. Erstens wird, zur generellen Einschätzung der Platzierung der jeweiligen Forschunsgsräume, die Entwicklung der Gesamtforschungsaufwendungen nachgezeichnet und verglichen. Zweitens stellt sich die Frage nach den jeweiligen Finanzierungsformen (Staat versus Wirtschaft), drittens nach den jeweiligen Mustern der Durchführung differenziert nach Forschungseinrichtungen (Universitäten versus Wirtschaft). Nicht zuletzt ist viertens die inhaltliche Verteilung über verschiedene F&E-Aktivitäten (Grundlagenforschung, angewandte Forschung bzw. experimentelle Entwicklung) für die gegenwärtige Platzierung der jeweiligen Forschungssysteme und ihre Entwicklungsoptionen relevant. Die Ergebnisse werden schließlich in einer skizzenhaften vergleichenden Typologie nationaler (bzw. national aggregierter) Forschungssysteme verdichtet und diese zur Diskussion gestellt.' (Autorenreferat)'The conceptual frame of the article refers to ideas about the importance of the knowledge base for society and economy, introducing the concept of the 'knowledge state' that reflects the conditions of the knowledge base as well as opportunities of politics for promoting knowledge. In the context of an international comparison the analysis focuses on structures, challenges and options for development of national (nationally aggregated) research systems, using quantitative indicators for the key research questions and problem assessments. We refer to the research systems of the EU, the U.S. and of Japan. The applied indicators are placed at different levels. First, for a global positioning of these research areas, the comprehensive national expenditure for research is traced and compared. Second, we concentrate on specific modes of financing (government versus business). Third, we differentiate the specific patterns of research performance (universities versus business). Finally, fourth, also the content-based distribution of different R&D activities (basic research, applied research and experimental development) plays an important role for the placement of the research systems and their options for development. The results we tie together into a comparative draft typology of national (nationally aggregated) research systems, and propose several hypotheses for discussion.' (author's abstract

Strukturen und Modelle der Forschungsfinanzierung in Deutschland: eine Policy-Analyse

"This paper focuses on the financing patterns of R&D (research and experimental development) in Germany. Primarily we reflected on the experiences of West Germany and the method of our analysis is based on expert interviews, of which most were carried out in December 1992. A twofold approach was followed. (1) Firstly, the structural framework of the German R&D system, and its financing, are described with a particular emphasis on the policy profiles of the DFG (German Research Society) and the BMFT (Federal Ministry of Research and Technology). Additionally, we also covered the latest trends in the financing of academic research. (2) Secondly, we aimed at three German success models for the financing of R&D. These are: – The Verbund-Research (Collaborative Research) of the BMFT: Within this scheme academic and industrial research partners are linked and the BMFT only partially finances those clusters (the threshold of financing for the BMFT is 50%). – The Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (FhG/Fraunhofer Society): The FhG, a nonuniversity research network, has a mixed funding base, consisting of three components – public basic funding, public contract funding and private (industrial) contract funding. – The implementation of foundations: The two major German foundations, the Volkswagen Foundation (VW-Stiftung) and the Environment Foundation (Umwelt-Stiftung), originated from the privatization of public industrial ownership. The German foundations play a key role for the financing of R&D and developed, through a special policy profile, a division of labor with public institutions (like the DFG and BMFT)." [author's abstract