Does distance hinder the collaboration between Australian universities in the humanities, arts and social sciences?

Australia is a vast country with an average distance of 1911 km between its eight state capital cities. The quantitative impact of this distance on collaboration practices between Australian universities and between different types of Australian universities has not been examined previously and hence our knowledge about the spatial distribution effects, if any, on collaboration practices and opportunities is very limited. The aim of the study reported here was therefore to analyse the effect of distance on the collaboration activities of humanities, arts and social science scholars in Australia, using co-authorship as a proxy for collaboration. In order to do this, gravity models were developed to determine the distance effects on external collaboration between universities in relation to geographic region and institutional alliance of 25 Australian universities. Although distance was found to have a weak impact on external collaboration, the strength of the research publishing record within a university (internal collaboration) was found to be an important factor in determining external collaboration activity levels. This finding would suggest that increasing internal collaboration within universities could be an effective strategy to encourage external collaboration between universities. This strategy becomes even more effective for universities that are further away from each other. Establishing a hierarchical structure of different types of universities within a region can optimise the location advantage in the region to encourage knowledge exchange within that region. The stronger network could also attract more collaboration between networks

La Salaria in et\ue0 tardoantica e altomedievale. Atti del Convegno di studi (Rieti \u2013 Cascia \u2013 Norcia \u2013 Ascoli Piceno, 28-30 settembre 2001)

Model norweski stanowi próbę całościowego ujęcia recenzowanych publikacji naukowych we wszystkich obszarach wiedzy – z uwzględnieniem preferowanych typów publikacji i języków publikacji w naukach humanistycznych – za pomocą jednego ważonego wskaźnika, pozwalającego porównywać efekty badań naukowych wewnątrz różnych instytutów i wydziałów oraz pomiędzy instytucjami badawczymi. W artykule opisano główne składniki Modelu, metodę jego wdrożenia oraz efekty i doświadczenia trzech krajów wykorzystujących go, w których przeprowadzono jego ewaluację: Belgii (Flandrii), Danii i Norwegii. Zakończenie zawiera analizę Modelu z perspektywy nauk humanistycznych.The ‘Norwegian Model’ attempts to comprehensively cover all the peer reviewed scholarly literatures in all areas of research – including the preferred formats and languages of scholarly publishing in the humanities – in one single weighted indicator which makes the research efforts comparable across departments and faculties within and between research institutions. This article describes the main components of the model and how it has been implemented, as well as the effects and experiences in three of the countries that are making use of the model, and where it has been evaluated: Belgium (Flanders), Denmark and Norway. The article concludes with a discussion of the model from the perspective of the humanities

Peer Review in SSH. Addressing the Interpretation of Quality Criteria

The chapter examines the experience of High keve exoert groups launched in the Italian experience in order to fine tune the instruments for research evaluatio in SSH, namely the peer review questionnaires, formats and scores. It also gives an account of the main contriversies surrounding the evaluation