|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Oswald, Andrew J. (University of Warwick) |
| Abstract: | How should the productivity of research universities be measured? This task is difficult but important. The recent Research Excellence Framework in the UK, which was based on peer review, suggests that there has been a marked improvement in UK academic research in economics and in many other subjects. But is it possible to design an objective check on, and measure of, a nation's 'world-leading research'? Following a variant of a method developed in Oswald (2010), I examine citations data on 450 genuinely world-leading journal articles over the Research Excellence Framework period 2008-2014. The UK produced 54 of these articles, namely, 12%. This compares to 45 articles, namely 10%, using the same methodology over the Research Assessment Exercise period 2001-2008. I conclude that it is possible to produce an objective measure of world-leading research, and that UK economics did show a small improvement. |
| Keywords: | economics of science, evaluation, European economics, United Kingdom, peer-review, Research Excellence Framework (REF), citations, Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) |
| JEL: | J0 D24 I23 J24 O32 |
| Date: | 2015–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp8829&r=sog |
| By: | Daniel S. Hamermesh |
| Abstract: | The previously documented trend toward more co- and multi-authored research in economics is partly (perhaps 20 percent) due to different research styles of scholars in different birth cohorts (of different ages). Most of the trend reflects profession-wide changes in research style. Older scholars show greater variation in their research styles than younger ones, who use similar numbers of co-authors in each published paper; but there are no differences across cohorts in scholars’ willingness to work with different coauthors. There are only small gender differences in the impacts of age on numbers of coauthors, but substantial differences on choice of coauthors. |
| JEL: | A11 B31 J01 |
| Date: | 2015–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:20938&r=sog |
| By: | Geuna, Aldo; Kataishi, Rodrigo; Manuel Toselli; Guzmán, Eduardo; Cornelia, Lawson; Ana Fernandez-Zubieta; Barros, Beatriz (University of Turin) |
| Abstract: | This paper describes the methodology and software tool used to build a database on the careers and productivity of academics, using public information available on the Internet, and provides a first analysis of the data collected for a sample of 360 US scientists funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and 291 UK scientists funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). The tool’s structured outputs can be used for either econometric research or data representation for policy analysis. The methodology and software tool is validated for a sample of US and UK biomedical scientists, but can be applied to any countries where scientists’ CVs are available in English. We provide an overview of the motivations for constructing the database, and the data crawling and data mining techniques used to transform webpage - based information and CV information into a relational database. We describe the database and the effectiveness of our algorithms a nd provide suggestions for further improvements. The software developed is released under free software GNU General Public License ; the aim is for it to be available to the community of social scientists and economists interested in analysing scientific production and scientific careers, who it is hoped will develop this tool further. |
| Date: | 2015–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:uto:dipeco:201506&r=sog |
| By: | Julie Poirier; Nick Johnstone; Ivan Haščič; Jérôme Silva |
| Abstract: | This paper presents an analysis of the effect of international co-authorship of scientific publications on patenting in wind energy technologies. It is found that the number of scientific publications co-authored by researchers in OECD countries has a positive and very significant impact on the number of wind energy innovations patented in OECD countries. However, non-OECD countries produce a greater number of patent filings when their researchers collaborate with OECD countries. This suggests that there exist knowledge spillovers between OECD and non-OECD countries that particularly benefit non-OECD countries. This empirical finding is important because it strengthens the case for international research cooperation between OECD and non-OECD countries in the area of climate mitigation.<BR>On trouvera dans le présent document une analyse de l’incidence que le co-autorat international de publications scientifiques a sur le brevetage des technologies éoliennes. Il apparaît que le nombre de publications scientifiques rédigées conjointement par des chercheurs de la région OCDE a un impact positif et très significatif sur le nombre des innovations brevetées par les pays membres dans le domaine de l’énergie éolienne. Toutefois, on observe également que les pays non membres sont à l’origine d’un plus grand nombre de demandes de brevets lorsque les chercheurs de ces pays collaborent avec des homologues de pays de l’OCDE. Cela laisse penser qu’un transfert indirect de connaissances s’opère entre les pays membres et non membres de l’OCDE, principalement pour le bénéfice de ces derniers. Cette constatation empirique est importante car elle apporte un argument supplémentaire en faveur de la coopération entre chercheurs des pays membres et non membres de l’OCDE dans le domaine de l’atténuation du changement climatique. |
| Keywords: | knowledge spillovers, climate change mitigation, innovation, scientific collaboration, collaboration scientifique, innovation, atténuation du changement climatique, diffusion des connaissances. |
| JEL: | O3 O31 O38 Q4 Q42 Q48 Q55 |
| Date: | 2015–02–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:envaaa:81-en&r=sog |
| By: | Guenther, Isabel; Grosse, Melanie; Klasen, Stephan |
| Abstract: | We examine the determinants of the number of attendees and questions and comments in parallel sessions at a large economics conference. We use the annual meeting of the German economics association in 2012 in G ttingen as an empirical case study. We find that the place (close to the coffee and before lunch) of the presentation is most important for attendance, whereas the person and the paper presented has a minor effect on other academics attending the presentation. However, papers with long titles as well as those by junior researchers attract significantly fewer attendees. There are also interesting and sizable gender effects. Sessions by female presenters are frequented more, but mainly because more women attend sessions in general, and sessions with female presenters in particular. Female researchers are also interested in different topics than male researchers. When it comes to asking questions, location becomes less important, but smaller rooms lead to more questions asked. Younger researchers attract more questions. Women ask fewer questions, but a large share of women increases the likelihood of a woman to ask a question. Our findings suggest that scheduling sessions should be taken more seriously to ensure better participation at conferences, and to take into account differences in preferences between men and female researchers. |
| JEL: | A11 B54 Z00 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:vfsc14:100392&r=sog |
| By: | Brigitte Hausstein; Ralf Toepfer |
| Abstract: | The Registration Agency da|ra operates as the registration agency for social science and economic data jointly run by GESIS and ZBW. da|ra pursues the goal of long-term, persistent identification and availability of research data via allocation of DOI names. |
| Keywords: | ratswd, ratswd working paper, da|ra, research data, DOI |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps242&r=sog |
| By: | Justus Haucap; Tobias Thomas; Gert G. Wagner |
| Abstract: | Das Papier zeigt, dass die seit Jahrzehnten andauernde Klagen wissenschaftlich tätiger Ökonomen,dass Öffentlichkeit und Politik nicht genug auf Ergebnisse der ökonomischen Forschung hören,zumindest für Deutschland im Quervergleich zu anderen Wissenschaften in Bezug auf das medialeInteressen an ökonomischen Erkenntnissen nicht gerechtfertigt sind. Es wird in bemerkenswerterWeise von der Resonanz kontrastiert, die Ökonomen in Deutschland im Vergleich zu anderenWissenschaftlern in den Medien genießen. Auch in Kreisen wirtschaftspolitischerEntscheidungsträger finden Ökonomen deutlich mehr Gehör als Nicht-Ökonomen. Keine andereWissenschaft erreicht in den Medien und bei Wirtschaftspolitikern auch nur annährend die gleicheAufmerksamkeit wie die Ökonomie. Die empirische Evidenz zeigt zugleich aber auch, dass Aussagenwissenschaftlicher Experten in den Medien in der Regel nur etwa ein bis zwei Prozent aller Aussagenausmachen. Damit bleiben nahezu alle Experten unterhalb der Wahrnehmungsschwelle für dasbreitere Publikum und entfalten so kaum öffentliche Wirkung. |
| Keywords: | Politikberatung, Ökonomen, Nicht-Ökonomen, Medien, Entscheidungsträger,Institutionen |
| JEL: | A11 A14 Z18 |
| Date: | 2015 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1449&r=sog |