|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Ma, Ji (The University of Texas at Austin); Cheng, Yuan |
| Abstract: | We (1) present the landscape of the citations of Public Administration and Policy (PAP) scholarly articles in policy documents, and (2) examine influencing factors along three dimensions: collaborative teams, cross-disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms. Using data from the 30 most-cited PAP peer-reviewed journals and 38, 062 documents from 1, 107 policy institutions, we find that 10.1% of all PAP scholarship receives high citations from both academics and policy communities. Collaborative teams, cross-disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms can all increase the citations within policy communities, yet the relationships are not linear. Non-academic authors can consistently attract more policy citations, whether publishing alone or collaborating with academics. An article should ideally cite no more than 13 disciplinary subjects. No significant trade-off between scholarly and policy impact as scholarly citations and the academic reputation of authors often translate into policy citations. These findings offer novel and concrete insights into optimizing academic research for policy impact. |
| Date: | 2024–07–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:8372e |
| By: | Thibaut Arpinon (CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Marianne Lefebvre (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement) |
| Abstract: | The distribution of published scientific evidence is biased. There is accumulating evidence of the frequent use of questionable publishing practices and questionable research practices, and current solutions are limited. This has important undesirable consequences for policy-oriented areas such as agricultural economics. In this article, we discuss a potential solution: Registered Reports. We first provide an overview of the Registered Report publication format. We demonstrate how Registered Reports outperform pre-registration, while also efficiently contributing to reducing questionable research practices, canceling questionable publishing practices, and providing more reliable results that can inform evidence-based policymaking. Second, we present a benchmark of Registered Reports in economics today and discuss potential barriers using survey data from economic journal editors. Lastly, we highlight the importance of developing the Registered Report publication format in agricultural economics. |
| Keywords: | Registered Reports open science questionable research practices questionable publishing practices JEL classification: Q18, Q10, C80, Registered Reports, open science, questionable research practices, questionable publishing practices JEL classification: Q18 |
| Date: | 2024–04–13 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04635986 |
| By: | Claudio Vitari (CERGAM - Centre d'Études et de Recherche en Gestion d'Aix-Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - UTLN - Université de Toulon); Zakaria Laala (CERGAM - Centre d'Études et de Recherche en Gestion d'Aix-Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - UTLN - Université de Toulon) |
| Abstract: | The traditional model of academic publishing, characterized by paid subscriptions, has historically restricted access to research findings, posing barriers for researchers and institutions with limited resources (Suber, 2012). In response, the open access (OA) movement has gained momentum, advocating for free and unrestricted access to scholarly literature online, thereby promoting transparency and equitable knowledge dissemination (Suber, 2012). This literature review examines the economic, social, and environmental impacts of various OA journal models, encompassing gold, green, hybrid, and emerging diamond routes. The economic impact of OA models, including cost structures and funding mechanisms such as Article Processing Charges (APCs), is analyzed to understand their implications for publishers, authors, and institutions (Björk et al., 2017; Morrison, 2017). Socially, OA fosters inclusivity by removing financial barriers and enhancing global scientific collaboration, thus democratizing access to knowledge (Houghton & Swan, 2011; Hilton III, 2016). However, the environmental footprint of OA remains underexplored, with emerging concerns over digital sustainability and carbon emissions associated with online publishing (Bouffard et al., 2022). Methodologically, this review synthesizes findings from 20 selected articles using systematic search queries and inclusion criteria based on economic, social, and ecological dimensions (Van Ooijen et al., 2023). By employing a comprehensive framework, we assess the state of knowledge regarding OA impacts and propose future research directions to optimize its benefits while mitigating potential drawbacks. Ultimately, this review underscores the transformative potential of OA in reshaping scholarly communication and calls for continued empirical research to inform evidence-based policy and practice in academic publishing. |
| Keywords: | Open access peer-reviewed articles publishing models degrowth, Open access, peer-reviewed articles, publishing models, degrowth |
| Date: | 2024–06–18 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04633659 |