IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v5y2019i1d10.1057_s41599-018-0213-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research governance and the future(s) of research assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Alis Oancea

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

This paper explores recent public debates around research assessment and its future as part of a dynamic landscape of governance discourses and practices, and organisational, professional and disciplinary cultures. Drawing reflectively on data from RAE 2001, RAE 2008 and REF 2014 (reported elsewhere), the paper highlights how recent debates around research assessment echo longer-term changes in research governance. The following changes, and several critiques of their implications, are discussed: shifts in the principles for governing research and the rise of multi-purpose assessment; the spread of performance-based funding and external accountability for research; the use of metrics and indicators in research assessment; the boundary work taking place in defining and classifying units or fields for assessment; the emphasis on research impact as a component of research value; organisational recalibration across the sector; and the specialisation of blended professional practice. These changes are underpinned by persistent tensions around accountability; evaluation; measurement; demarcation; legitimation; agency; and identity in research. Overall, such trends and the discursive shifts that made them possible have challenged established principles of funding and governance and have pushed assessment technologies into a pivot position in the political dynamics of renegotiating the relationships between universities and the state. Jointly, the directions of travel identified in this paper describe a widespread and persistent regime of research governance and policy that has become embedded in institutional and individual practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Alis Oancea, 2019. "Research governance and the future(s) of research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0213-6
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0213-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-018-0213-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-018-0213-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claire Donovan, 2009. "Gradgrinding the Social Sciences: The Politics of Metrics of Political Science," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 7(1), pages 73-83, January.
    2. Peter Andras, 2011. "Research: metrics, quality, and management implications," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 90-106, June.
    3. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    4. Sarah de Rijcke & Paul F. Wouters & Alex D. Rushforth & Thomas P. Franssen & Björn Hammarfelt, 2016. "Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use—a literature review," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 161-169.
    5. Koen Jonkers & Thomas Zacharewicz, 2016. "Research Performance Based Funding Systems: a Comparative Assessment," JRC Research Reports JRC101043, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Phillimore, A. J., 1989. "University research performance indicators in practice: The University Grants Committee's evaluation of British universities, 1985-86," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 255-271, October.
    7. Steven Hill, 2016. "Assessing (for) impact: future assessment of the societal impact of research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-7, December.
    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. Reed, M.S. & Ferré, M. & Martin-Ortega, J. & Blanche, R. & Lawford-Rolfe, R. & Dallimer, M. & Holden, J., 2021. "Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    2. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele, 2023. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    3. Ioan Ianoş & Alexandru-Ionuţ Petrişor, 2020. "An Overview of the Dynamics of Relative Research Performance in Central-Eastern Europe Using a Ranking-Based Analysis Derived from SCImago Data," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-25, July.
    4. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:3:p:603-621. is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Melinda Craike & Bojana Klepac & Amy Mowle & Therese Riley, 2023. "Theory of systems change: An initial, middle-range theory of public health research impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 603-621.
    6. Brian Belcher & Janet Halliwell, 2021. "Conceptualizing the elements of research impact: towards semantic standards," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    7. Marton Demeter & Agnes Jele & Zsolt Balázs Major, 2022. "The model of maximum productivity for research universities SciVal author ranks, productivity, university rankings, and their implications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4335-4361, August.
    8. Alberto Corsini & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03912647, HAL.
    9. Richard Watermeyer & Gemma Elizabeth Derrick & Mar Borras Batalla, 2022. "Affective auditing: The emotional weight of the research excellence framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 498-506.
    10. Alberto Corsini & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Working Papers hal-03912647, HAL.
    11. Jorrit P Smit & Laurens K Hessels, 2021. "The production of scientific and societal value in research evaluation: a review of societal impact assessment methods [Systems Thinking, Knowledge and Action: Towards Better Models and Methods]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 323-335.
    12. Rokia Ballo & Warren Pearce & Jack Stilgoe & James Wilsdon, 2024. "Socially-distanced science: how British publics were imagined, modelled and marginalised in political and expert responses to the COVID-19 pandemic," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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. Kulczycki, Emanuel & Korzeń, Marcin & Korytkowski, Przemysław, 2017. "Toward an excellence-based research funding system: Evidence from Poland," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 282-298.
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Linda Sīle & Raf Vanderstraeten, 2019. "Measuring changes in publication patterns in a context of performance-based research funding systems: the case of educational research in the University of Gothenburg (2005–2014)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 71-91, January.
    4. Ohid Yaqub & Dmitry Malkov & Josh Siepel, 2023. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 273-285.
    5. Dzieżyc, Maciej & Kazienko, Przemysław, 2022. "Effectiveness of research grants funded by European Research Council and Polish National Science Centre," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    6. Molly Morgan Jones & Catriona Manville & Joanna Chataway, 2022. "Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 722-746, June.
    7. Renata Kudaibergenova & Sandugash Uzakbay & Asselya Makanova & Kymbat Ramadinkyzy & Erlan Kistaubayev & Ruslan Dussekeev & Kadyrzhan Smagulov, 2022. "Managing publication change at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 453-479, January.
    8. Rafols, Ismael & Stirling, Andy, 2020. "Designing indicators for opening up evaluation. Insights from research assessment," SocArXiv h2fxp, Center for Open Science.
    9. Calabrese, Armando & Capece, Guendalina & Costa, Roberta & Di Pillo, Francesca & Giuffrida, Stefania, 2018. "A ‘power law’ based method to reduce size-related bias in indicators of knowledge performance: An application to university research assessment," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1263-1281.
    10. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Iori, Giulia & Maynou, Laia & Tumminello, Michele & Vassallo, Pietro, 2023. "Performance-based research funding: Evidence from the largest natural experiment worldwide," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    11. Yaşar Tonta & Müge Akbulut, 2020. "Does monetary support increase citation impact of scholarly papers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1617-1641, November.
    12. Selcuk Besir Demir, 2018. "Pros and cons of the new financial support policy for Turkish researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2053-2068, September.
    13. Cristian Barra & Ornella Wanda Maietta & Roberto Zotti, 2021. "The effects of university academic research on firm’s propensity to innovate at local level: evidence from Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 483-530, April.
    14. Daniella Bayle Deutz & Thea Marie Drachen & Dorte Drongstrup & Niels Opstrup & Charlotte Wien, 2021. "Quantitative quality: a study on how performance-based measures may change the publication patterns of Danish researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3303-3320, April.
    15. Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Bibliometrics in Press. Representations and uses of bibliometric indicators in the Italian daily newspapers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2195-2233, May.
    16. Emanuela Reale, 2017. "Analysis of National Public Research Funding (PREF) - Final Report," JRC Research Reports JRC107599, Joint Research Centre.
    17. Muhammad Dimyati & Adhi Indra Hermanu, 2023. "Evaluating Research Efficiency in Indonesian Higher Education Institution," Evaluation Review, , vol. 47(2), pages 155-181, April.
    18. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    19. Robert A. Buckle & John Creedy, 2022. "Methods to evaluate institutional responses to performance‐based research funding systems," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 615-634, September.
    20. Mehmet Pinar, 2023. "Do research performances of universities and disciplines in England converge or diverge? An assessment of the progress between research excellence frameworks in 2014 and 2021," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5731-5766, October.
    21. David A. Pendlebury, 2019. "Charting a path between the simple and the false and the complex and unusable: Review of Henk F. Moed, Applied Evaluative Informetrics [in the series Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Scientifi," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 549-560, April.

    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:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0213-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.