IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i8p837-d534454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic Evaluation Model for Developing Sustainable World-Class Universities: An East Asian Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Meng-Chen Zhang

    (Faculty of Humanities and Arts, Macau University of Science and Technology, Avenida Wai Long, Taipa 999078, Macau, China
    Department of Public Administration and Policy, College of Public Affairs, National Taipei University, 151, University Rd., San Shia District, New Taipei 23741, Taiwan)

  • Bo-Wei Zhu

    (Faculty of Humanities and Arts, Macau University of Science and Technology, Avenida Wai Long, Taipa 999078, Macau, China)

  • Chao-Meng Huang

    (Department of Public Administration and Policy, College of Public Affairs, National Taipei University, 151, University Rd., San Shia District, New Taipei 23741, Taiwan)

  • Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng

    (Graduate Institute of Urban Planning, College of Public Affairs, National Taipei University, 151, University Rd., San Shia District, New Taipei 23741, Taiwan)

Abstract

Due to the unbalance between Asian and Western countries in terms of higher education development and pressure from global competition, universities in several East Asian countries have striven to become world-class universities (WCUs) by actively assessing themselves using various global ranking systems and subsequently investing in key performance indicators. Numerous scholars have suggested that for these East Asian catch-up universities (EACUs), independently improving the elements related to high-weight indicators could produce short-term increases in ranking performance; however, this approach is not conducive to sustainable development. In addition, little is currently understood regarding sustainable development strategies for developing EACUs into WCUs. This study proposes a systematic evaluation model for self-assessment and the creation of strategies to transform EACUs into sustainable WCUs. The fuzzy Delphi method was used to determine criteria for a new evaluation framework, and the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory method was employed to construct the influential relationships among the criteria. Two cases were then selected to demonstrate the superiority of the model for creating sustainable development strategies for EACUs. This study provides a systematic perspective and a useful tool for decision-makers at EACUs to achieve sustainable development goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Meng-Chen Zhang & Bo-Wei Zhu & Chao-Meng Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2021. "Systematic Evaluation Model for Developing Sustainable World-Class Universities: An East Asian Perspective," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:8:p:837-:d:534454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/8/837/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/8/837/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paolo Paruolo & Michaela Saisana & Andrea Saltelli, 2013. "Ratings and rankings: voodoo or science?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(3), pages 609-634, June.
    2. Ibrahim Shehatta & Khalid Mahmood, 2016. "Correlation among top 100 universities in the major six global rankings: policy implications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1231-1254, November.
    3. Fei Shu & Wei Quan & Bikun Chen & Junping Qiu & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2020. "The role of Web of Science publications in China’s tenure system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1683-1695, March.
    4. Jill Johnes, 2018. "University rankings: What do they really show?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 585-606, April.
    5. Jacek Pietrucha, 2018. "Country-specific determinants of world university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1129-1139, March.
    6. Marlo M Vernon & E Andrew Balas & Shaher Momani, 2018. "Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Tien-Li Chen & Chin-Chuan Chen & Yen-Ching Chuang & James J. H. Liou, 2020. "A Hybrid MADM Model for Product Design Evaluation and Improvement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.
    9. Sung-Shun Weng & Yang Liu & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2019. "Reform of Chinese Universities in the Context of Sustainable Development: Teacher Evaluation and Improvement Based on Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Anthony F. J. Raan & Thed N. Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser, 2011. "Severe language effect in university rankings: particularly Germany and France are wronged in citation-based rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 495-498, August.
    11. Bo-Wei Zhu & Jia-Rui Zhang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Shan-Lin Huang & Lei Xiong, 2017. "Public Open Space Development for Elderly People by Using the DANP-V Model to Establish Continuous Improvement Strategies towards a Sustainable and Healthy Aging Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-29, March.
    12. Lei Xiong & Cheng-Lein Teng & Yu-Qi Li & Yuan-Zone Lee & Bo-Wei Zhu & Kun Liu, 2019. "A Qualitative-Quantitative Evaluation Model for Systematical Improving the Creativity of Students’ Design Scheme," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, May.
    13. Kuroiwa, Ikuo & Nabeshima, Kaoru & Tanaka, Kiyoyasu, 2011. "Innovation networks in China, Japan, and Korea : evidence from Japanese patent data," IDE Discussion Papers 285, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Schulze-González, Erik & Pastor-Ferrando, Juan-Pascual & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo, 2023. "Clustering and reference value for assessing influence in analytic network process without pairwise comparison matrices: Study of 17 real cases," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 10(C).
    2. Bo-Wei Zhu & Ying He Xiao & Wei-Quan Zheng & Lei Xiong & Xia Yun He & Jian-Yi Zheng & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2022. "A Hybrid Multiple-Attribute Decision-Making Model for Evaluating the Esthetic Expression of Environmental Design Schemes," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McAleer, M.J. & Nakamura, T. & Watkins, C., 2018. "Size, Internationalization and University Rankings: Evaluating Times Higher Education (THE) Data for Japan," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2018-43, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    2. Mónica Benito & Pilar Gil & Rosario Romera, 2019. "Funding, is it key for standing out in the university rankings?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 771-792, November.
    3. Michael McAleer & Tamotsu Nakamura & Clinton Watkins, 2019. "Size, Internationalization, and University Rankings: Evaluating and Predicting Times Higher Education (THE) Data for Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-12, March.
    4. Olavarrieta, Sergio & Quinteros, María José & Villena, Mauricio, 2021. "A Strategic Impact Model for Latin American Business Schools," MPRA Paper 107813, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Apr 2021.
    5. Csató, László & Tóth, Csaba, 2020. "University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 309-320.
    6. Jacqmin, Julien & Lefebvre, Mathieu, 2016. "Does sector-specific experience matter? The case of European higher education ministers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 987-998.
    7. Benito, M. & Gil, P. & Romera, R., 2020. "Evaluating the influence of country characteristics on the Higher Education System Rankings’ progress," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    8. Rosalia CASTELLANO & Antonella ROCCA, 2018. "Gender disparities in European labour markets: A comparison of conditions for men and women in paid employment," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 157(4), pages 589-608, December.
    9. Syed Haider Khalil & Syed Mohsin Ali Shah & Fahad Sultan & Muhammad Ibrahim Khan & Sher Nawaz, 2023. "Categories and Institutional Change: Contesting the Uncontested Space Through National Rankings," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    10. Tien-Li Chen & Chin-Chuan Chen & Yen-Ching Chuang & James J. H. Liou, 2020. "A Hybrid MADM Model for Product Design Evaluation and Improvement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    11. Buckley, Ralf, 2019. "Tourism publications as newly tradeable commodities: Academic performance, prestige, power, competition, constraints and consents," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 121-133.
    12. Neszveda, Gábor & Horváth, Zsófia, 2024. "Új szempont a magyar felsőoktatási intézmények teljesítményének mérésében - az egyetemek online láthatósága [Online visibility - A new aspect of measuring the performance of Hungarian higher educat," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 755-790.
    13. Frank J. Rijnsoever & Laurens K. Hessels, 2021. "How academic researchers select collaborative research projects: a choice experiment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1917-1948, December.
    14. Enis Siniksaran & M. Hakan Satman, 2020. "WURS: a simulation software for university rankings—software review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 701-717, January.
    15. Chao Shi & Kenneth C. Land, 2021. "The Data Envelopment Analysis and Equal Weights/Minimax Methods of Composite Social Indicator Construction: a Methodological Study of Data Sensitivity and Robustness," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(4), pages 1689-1716, August.
    16. See, Kok Fong & Ng, Ying Chu & Yu, Ming-Miin, 2022. "An alternative assessment approach to national higher education system evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Zornić, Nikola & Dobrota, Marina & Jeremić, Veljko, 2016. "Measuring the Stability of University Rankings in the Field of Education," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2016), Rovinj, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Rovinj, Croatia, 8-9 September 2016, pages 294-301, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    18. Osmo Kivinen & Juha Hedman & Kalle Artukka, 2017. "Scientific publishing and global university rankings. How well are top publishing universities recognized?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 679-695, July.
    19. Eric L. Sevigny & Michaela Saisana, 2016. "Measuring Interstate Variations in the Consequences of Illegal Drugs: A Composite Indicator Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 501-529, September.
    20. Milica Maricic & Jose A. Egea & Veljko Jeremic, 2019. "A Hybrid Enhanced Scatter Search—Composite I-Distance Indicator (eSS-CIDI) Optimization Approach for Determining Weights Within Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 497-537, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:8:p:837-:d:534454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.