IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v15y2006i2p133-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodologies for the analysis of research funding and expenditure: from input to positioning indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Benedetto Lepori

Abstract

This paper discusses the status of indicators concerning research funding and expenditure and proposes some pathways for further developments. First, I discuss in depth the design of the R&D statistics based on the Frascati manual and its limitations concerning analytical categories, data availability and quality. Further I argue that, to answer to specific policy questions concerning the allocation of funds, the development of a new generation of indicators is needed — so-called positioning indicators — focusing on the analysis of financial fluxes between research funders, intermediaries and performers, and I present some recent results of comparative European work in this direction. Finally, I draw some general methodological lessons on the nature of these indicators and on the procedure for their production, discussing key aspects such as reproducibility, quality validation, simplicity, contingency and transparency. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedetto Lepori, 2006. "Methodologies for the analysis of research funding and expenditure: from input to positioning indicators," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 133-143, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:15:y:2006:i:2:p:133-143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154406781775995
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ulrich Schmoch, 2014. "The research output of universities: conceptual and methodological problems," Chapters, in: Andrea Bonaccorsi (ed.), Knowledge, Diversity and Performance in European Higher Education, chapter 4, pages iii-iii, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Hung, Chia-Liang & Chou, Jerome Chih-Lung & Roan, Hung-Wei, 2010. "Evaluating a national science and technology program using the human capital and relational asset perspectives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 487-497, November.
    3. Lili Miao & Vincent Larivi`ere & Feifei Wang & Yong-Yeol Ahn & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2023. "Cooperation and interdependence in global science funding," Papers 2308.08630, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    4. Bozeman, Barry & Rimes, Heather & Youtie, Jan, 2015. "The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 34-49.
    5. Elisabetta Marinelli & Alexander Degelsegger & Katharina Buesel & Mariana Chioncel & Mathieu Doussineau & Karel Haegeman & Gérard Carat & Patrice dos Santos & Stephanie Daimer, 2014. "ERA Fabric Map Second Edition," JRC Research Reports JRC85302, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    7. Irene Ramos-Vielba & Manuel Fernández-Esquinas & Elena Espinosa-de-los-Monteros, 2010. "Measuring university–industry collaboration in a regional innovation system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 649-667, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:rseval:v:15:y:2006:i:2:p:133-143. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.