|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2011‒02‒12
five papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Radu Vranceanu (Economics Department - ESSEC Business School); Damien Besancenot (CEPN - Centre d'économie de l'Université de Paris Nord - CNRS : UMR7115 - Université Paris-Nord - Paris XIII); Kim Huynh (L.E.M. - Laboratoire d'Economie Moderne - Université Paris 2) |
| Abstract: | Given the myriad of journal titles in economics and business administration, scholars can sometimes target the wrong journal. This paper provides a dynamic analysis of the market for academic publications that brings into the picture this type of informational friction. The key modelling device is a paper-tojournal matching function, similar to the matching function traditional in labor economics. An equilibrium is defined as a situation where both editors and authors implement their optimal publication strategies. The model is then solved for the equilibrium submission fee, desk rejection rate and ratio between the number of editors and the number of authors. |
| Keywords: | Academic Journals ; Editors ; Imperfect Information ; Matching |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00554710&r=sog |
| By: | Max Wilkinson |
| Abstract: | DataCite is an international consortium which aims to increase acceptance of research data as legitimate, citable contributions to scholarly communication. To enable this DataCite assigns persistent identifiers for research datasets and manages the infrastructu res that support simple and effective methods of data citation, discovery and access. DataCite leverages the DOI infrastructure, which is already well-established. DOI names are the mostly widely used identifier for scientific journal articles, so researchers, authors, and publishers are familiar with their use. DataCite takes an open approach, however, and considers identifier systems and services that help forward its objectives. DataCite is represented in the UK by the British Library. This summary of the British Library’s involvement in DataCite was presented to the UK data Forum on Monday the 15th November 2010. Data publishers that wish to know more about DataCite or to use DataCite services are encouraged to contact the Library or their local DataCite members. Further information and useful websites: www.datacite.org.uk / www.datacite.org / www.doi.org |
| Keywords: | Open Access, Research Data, Scientific Use, Public Use |
| JEL: | C89 L86 |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps163&r=sog |
| By: | Christine L. Borgman |
| Abstract: | The deluge of scientific research data has excited the general public, as well as the scientific community, with the possibilities for better understanding of scientific problems, from climate to culture. For data to be available, researchers must be willing and able to share them. The policies of governments, funding agencies, journals, and university tenure and promotion committees also influence how, when, and whether research data are shared. Data are complex objects. Their purposes and the methods by which they are produced vary widely across scientific fields, as do the criteria for sharing them. To address these challenges, it is necessary to examine the arguments for sharing data and how those arguments match the motivations and interests of the scientific community and the public. Four arguments are examined: to make the results of publicly funded data available to the public, to enable others to ask new questions of extant data, to advance the state of science, and to reproduce research. Libraries need to consider their role in the face of each of these arguments, and what expertise and systems they require for data curation. |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps161&r=sog |
| By: | Semenov, Andrey A. |
| Keywords: | history of management in Russia, scientific systems of labour organization, social consequences of the use of the taylorism, ways of increasing productivity, |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sps:wpaper:181&r=sog |
| By: | Kathleen A. Carroll (UMBC); Lisa M. Dickson (UMBC); Jane E. Ruseski (University of Alberta) |
| Abstract: | This paper develops models of decision making in a university setting with and without faculty participation. The models predict values for the level of services or programs offered and the quality of those services in a university setting for either private nonprofit or public universities. These predictions indicate conditions under which outcomes are similar or differ with faculty participation in the decision process. The model predicts that without shared governance that universities may overinvest in non-academic quality (e.g. athletics, recreational activities). This would be exacerbated in for-profit forms of higher education. Notably, nonprofit and/or public institutions are not inefficient relative to for-profit institutions, which questions the rationale for subsidies to for-profit institutions. If academic quality provides positive externalities as has been suggested in the literature, then shared governance may be socially preferred to university decision making without faculty involvement. |
| Keywords: | higher education, faculty governance, university decision making, incentives, nonprofit organization, public organization, organizational behavior |
| Date: | 2011–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:umb:econwp:11129&r=sog |