What makes a great journal great in economics?: The singer not the song

This paper analyses what makes a great journal great in economics. Alternative research assessment measures (RAM) are discussed, with an emphasis on the Thomson Reuters Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science database. ISI RAM that are calculated annually or updated daily are defined, including the classic 2-year impact factor (2YIF), 5-year impact factor (5YIF), immediacy (zero-year impact factor (0YIF)), eigenfactor score, article influence, citation performance per paper online, h-index, Zinfluence, PI-BETA (papers ignored - by even the authors) and two new RAM measures, self-citation threshold approval rating and impact factor inflation. The data are analysed for the most highly cited journals in economics, management, business and business-finance on the basis of 2YIF. In addition to evaluating research in the most highly cited journals in economics, management, business and business-finance, the paper evaluates alternative RAM, highlights similarities and differences in RAM criteria, finds that several RAM capture similar performance characteristics, and finds that immediacy and PI-BETA are not highly correlated with other RAM. Harmonic mean rankings of the 12 RAM criteria are also presented. Emphasizing 2YIF to the exclusion of other useful RAM criteria can lead to a distorted evaluation of journal performance and influence. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

The governance and performance of universities: evidence from Europe and the US

"We test the hypothesis that universities are more productive when they are both more autonomous and face more competition. Using survey data, we construct indices of university autonomy and competition for both Europe and the United States. We show that there are strong positive correlations between these indices and multiple measures of university output. To obtain causal evidence, we investigate exogenous shocks to US universities' expenditures over three decades. These shocks arise through the political appointment process, which we use to generate instrumental variables. We find that an exogenous increase in a university's expenditure generates more output, measured by either patents or publications, if the university is more autonomous and faces more competition. Exploiting variation over time in the 'stakes' of competitions for US federal research grants, we also find that universities generate more output for a given expenditure when research competitions are high stakes. We draw lessons, arguing that European universities could benefit from a combination of greater autonomy and greater accountability. Greater accountability might come through increased reliance on competitive grants, enhanced competition for students and faculty (promoted by reforms that increase mobility), and yardstick competitions (which often take the form of assessment exercises)." Copyright (c) CEPR, CES, MSH, 2010.