The two sides of academic research: do basic and applied activities complement each other?

It is generally acknowledged that the cuts in government funding for research implemented in several European countries will induce academic researchers to increase their interaction with non academic entities to promote the acquisition of external funding for research. Indirectly this implies that there will be a shift in the focus of academic scientific activity from basic to applied research via private research contracts and consultancy work. The aim of our paper is to assess the extent of the trade-off between basic research and applied activity in academic research departments. We use data for the universe of Italian academic departments over the period 2006–2011 and estimate whether increased applied activity is substituting or complementing basic research activity. We provide empirical evidence of a strong substitution effect for life sciences departments and, to a lesser extent, for engineering and technology departments, while there does not seem to be evidence of a substitution effect for departments whose scientific activity revolves around basic science.     

Ranking Australian Economics Departments by Research Productivity

This study ranks Australian economics departments according to their average research productivity during 1998–2002. The highest ranked departments are those at ANU, JCU, Melbourne, Tasmania and UWA. We also rank departments according to the variability of research productivity among their members, the assumption being that, other things being equal, the less variable is productivity within a department, the better. Research productivity is found to be highly skewed within all departments. However, in general, research productivity is more (less) evenly distributed within those departments that have relatively high (low) average research productivity.     

The Handelsblatt Rankings 2.0: Research Rankings for the Economics Profession in Austria,Germany, and Switzerland

The distinguishing feature of all Handelsblatt rankings published over the last ten years is that they could draw on premium quality bibliometric data. We present here the new method used by KOF and DICE to compile the 2017 Handelsblatt Rankings of university departments and individual economists. As in previous years, the rankings are based on quality weighted journal publications. We show that the benchmark results are robust to various changes in the employed method, in particular to changes in the convexity of the journal quality weighting scheme. In conclusion, we show how the collected data can be used to provide customized evaluations of entire academic careers of individual economists.     

A Multidimensional Ranking of Australian Economics Departments

This study uses cluster analysis to classify Australian economics departments into groups that have similar quantities of research output, measured by two publication counts, and similar quality of research output, measured by a citation count. Three groups of departments are identified and factor analysis is used to rank the groups. Whether research output is measured in total or on a per staff basis, Melbourne is in the group that ranks first, the remaining members of the 'group of eight' are in one or other of the top two groups, and at least 15 other departments are in the third-ranked group.     

科研开发与经济增长——兼论科研开发的溢出效应

经济划分为科研部门和非科研部门，科研开发对经济增长的作用及科研对非科研部门具有外溢效应。1999-2003年30个省市自治区的面板数据表明，科研开发对经济增长具有较大的拉动作用，同时科研开发部门对其他部门的外溢作用明显为正。     

Research Ethics Education in Economics

Abstract

In this paper, we report the findings from the data we collected from a survey in order to measure how common research ethics education in economics is. We have found out that (1) research ethics is taught in only a very few economics departments around the globe; (2) topics related to research ethics are not taught in courses on economics and ethics; and (3) the number of papers published in specialised peer-reviewed journals on economics education is only a tiny fraction of the number of papers published in these journals. There has been no evidence in economics showing that economics departments have taken strong initiative on teaching research ethics to undergraduate and graduate students.     

The spatial distribution of innovation: evidence on the role of academic quality for seven European countries

The quality of academic research and research undertaken at public laboratories is an important determinant of successful technology transfer. Corporate innovativeness may benefit considerably from scientific discoveries at universities or public laboratories and from the availability of locally well-trained scientists and graduates. The extent to which quality matters is investigated for 86 European regions in seven countries between 1997 and 2007. We find that regions hosting research departments at the forefront of science produce significantly more inventions and more innovations, whereas the mere presence of R&D personnel in universities has no significant impact. The production of patents in high-technology domains instead does benefit from the presence of R&D personnel in public laboratories. These results complement the existing evidence on the relationship between public research and spatial distribution of innovation.     

THE TENURE GAME: BUILDING UP ACADEMIC HABITS*

Why do some academics continue to be productive after receiving tenure? This paper answers this question by using a Stackelberg differential game between departments and scholars. We show that departments can set tenure rules and standards as incentives for scholars to accumulate academic habits. As a result, academic habits have a lasting positive impact on scholar's productivity, leading to higher productivity growth rates and higher productivity levels.     

Research Productivity in Business Economics: The Case of Marketing

Abstract. The German Economic Review ( GER ) recently published a paper by Fabel, Hein and Hofmeister about research productivity in Austrian, German and Swiss universities. The authors derive the rankings of institutions and subject areas by analyzing an impressive and comprehensive dataset, which captures the research output of business administration departments. While these rankings might hold at an aggregate level, they lack face validity at a subject-specific level. This lack of validity is demonstrated in the case of marketing by analyzing the research output of the top-ranked institutions in top-ranked journals. A number of proposals to overcome these kinds of problems are provided.     

Economic Education in Korea: Current Status and Changes

The authors describe key aspects of precollege and undergraduate economic education in Korea. They show that precollege students seem to have low economics literacy due to problems with the curriculum and insufficient training of teachers. At the undergraduate level, they show that economics departments have more male students than female students and that the employment rate for economics majors is lower than for business majors. They hope to draw more of Korean economists' attention to research initiatives in economic education.     

Product market competition, R&D, and welfare

We compare the subgame perfect equilibrium emerging in four regimes of research and development (R&D) competition between duopolists: (i) full competition, (ii) coordination of research strategies, (iii) joint venture with cross licensing of patents, and (iv) full collusion in R&D and the product market. The outcome of the firms' interaction depends on the interplay of the degree of product market competition, the similarity of the research strategies, and the cost of R&D, relatively to market size. Our main result is that each of the four regimes can, for plausible parameter combinations, yield the highest level of welfare. Therefore it is problematic to draw general rules applicable to all proposed research joint ventures.     

论高校科研经费的联合管理

高校科研经费管理是一个系统工程,它不仅仅是财务管理部门的工作。要搞好科研经费的管理,应该实行财务部门、科研部门、国有资产管理部门、后勤部门及学院进行联合管理方法。针对高校科研管理的特点,在分析科研经费管理工作的现状和问题的基础上,对高校科研经费管各部门联合管理方法进行探讨。     

数学推理方法与现代经济学的杜撰性质

本文针对现代经济学的研究方法及其理论内涵中存在的问题进行研究。通过对现代经济学假设条件及其思维程序的分析,并将科学研究的三种方法与现代经济学的研究方法加以比较,得出的结论是:现代经济学没有事实基础,只是一套凭空杜撰的理论。而数学推理只是用来杜撰理论的工具;经济社会"客观性"和经济学"科学性"幻觉的驱动以及经济学界生存竞争等使得现代经济学走向远离现实的空想境界;经济学正确的研究方法应该是观察经济社会这个天然实验室中真实的实验结果。     

A Benchmark Profile of Economics Departments in 15 Private Universities

During the spring of 1999, the authors completed a benchmarking survey of 15 economics departments in private universities as part of a strategic planning exercise. All are selective medium-sized institutions that experience roughly the same types of market pressures and compete for the same types of students. The authors report the information gleaned from the survey concerning such items as departmental resources, teaching loads, class sizes, departmental research expectations, and weights given to research, teaching, and service in salary determination and promotion. The authors believe that their results and methods might be useful to other economics departments engaging in bench-marking exercises.     

Doing Economics: Enhancing Skills through a Process-Oriented Senior Research Course

The author describes a senior-level course designed to promote student skills in "acting like economists." Although most departments offer senior-level courses, this one is unique in that it was developed on the basis of learning as opposed to content objectives, assignments are designed to reinforce and further develop research skills through a project of the student's choosing, and it more closely models what it means to "act like an economist" (W. L. Hansen 2006). The author discusses the development of this course and its unique features, the research process followed by students and the outcomes generated, and some of the advantages and disadvantages associated with this form of senior research course.     

我国古村镇旅游研究进展

近10年来古村镇旅游研究紧随古村镇旅游的迅速发展而不断拓展,主要集中于古村镇旅游资源的保护与开发这一基础问题,而对影响古村镇旅游可持续发展的社区参与、旅游感知和经营管理等具体问题也较多关注。总体来看,现有研究还停留在现象、问题和矛盾关系的梳理上,较少地触及古村镇旅游发展的内在机理和演变规律,需要更多的学科支撑以拓展研究的视角,需要引入一些社会调查、计量与实验工具以充实研究的方法,需要更多的样本、实例以补充研究的领域,从而不断完善古村镇旅游研究体系,探索出具有中国特色的古村镇旅游发展之路。     

RANKING ECONOMICS DEPARTMENTS IN TERMS OF RESIDUAL PRODUCTIVITY: NEW ZEALAND ECONOMICS DEPARTMENTS, 2000–2006*

This paper utilises a human‐capital approach for ranking the research productivity of academic departments. Our approach provides rankings in terms of residual research output after controlling for the key characteristics of each department's academic staff. More specifically, we estimate residual research output rankings for all of New Zealand's economics departments based on their publication performance over the 2000 to 2006 period. We do so after taking into account the following characteristics of each department's academic staff: gender, experience, seniority, academic credentials and academic rank. The paper demonstrates that the rankings generated by the residual research approach and those generated by traditional approaches to research rankings may be significantly different for some departments. These differences are important in determining the likely efficiency impact of research assessment exercises.     

Evaluating The Research Output Of Australian Universities' Economics Departments

This paper presents measures of the research output of Australian economics departments. Our study covers the 640 academic staff at rank Lecturer and above in the 27 Australian universities with economics departments containing eight or more staff in April 2002. We construct publication measures based on journal articles, which can be compared with weighted publication measures, and citation measures, which can be compared with the publication measures. Our aim is to identify the robustness of rankings to the choice of method, as well as to highlight differences in focus of departments' research output. A striking feature of our measures is that the majority of economists in Australian university departments have done no research that has been published in a fairly long list of refereed journals over the last dozen years. They may publish in other outlets, but in any event their work is rarely cited. Thus, average research output is low because many academic economists in Australia do not view research as part of their job or, at least, suffer no penalty from failing to produce substantive evidence of research activity.     

Misleading Rankings of Research in Business

Abstract. The attempts by Schulze and colleagues and Ritzberger to develop a joint ranking of journals for economics and business research are critically evaluated. Their lists suggest that the quality of top business journals is substantially lower than that of many economics journals. If, however, the authors of these lists do not want to claim a general superiority of one discipline (economics) over another one (business), they should give a clear indication that these lists are only applicable for economists. This warning appears to be necessary because Fabel and colleagues derive a ranking of universities and departments with respect to research productivity in business from the business research discriminating list RbR_IMP by Schulze and colleagues. While Diamantopoulos and Wagner already show a lack of face validity of these results, this article explains that the reason for this lies not only in the downgrading and also biased weighting of the business journals across subfields, but even more importantly, in a remarkable incompleteness of the database.     

近十年来国内城市旅游研究进展

城市旅游的高速发展使其相关研究日益增多,已形成旅游研究的热点.通过对在中国期刊网上检索到的329篇(1998-2007年)核心期刊论文的分析,发现十年来城市旅游研究文献快速增长,但这些成果很难被纳入一个完整的系统;理论研究有所进展,但仍然为薄弱环节;多数成果为宏观和中观研究,微观研究明显不足;研究内容主要集中在城市旅游开发、资源利用、旅游形象研究等早、中期发展领域,而对城市旅游的影响等后期发展问题研究较少.最后提出了今后该学科发展的一些趋势.