IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rvr/journl/20109016.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Faut-il croire le classement de Shangaï ?

Author

Listed:
  • Billaut, Jean-Charles
  • Bouyssou, Denis
  • Vincke, Philippe

Abstract

Nous proposons dans cet article une analyse critique du classement mondial des universités publié chaque année par l’Institut de l’Enseignement supérieur de l’Université Jiao Tong de Shangaï et plus connu sous le nom de « classement de Shangaï ». Après avoir rappelé comment le classement est construit, nous discutons de la pertinence des critères utilisés. Nous analysons ensuite la méthode d’agrégation proposée. Notre analyse se fonde sur les outils et concepts de l’« aide multicritère à la décision ». Nos conclusions principales sont que les critères utilisés ne sont pas pertinents, que la méthode d’agrégation présente des problèmes majeurs et que l’exercice souffre d’une réflexion insuffisante sur les questions liées à la structuration du problème. Le classement de Shangaï, malgré la grande couverture médiatique qu’il reçoit chaque année, n’est donc pas un outil pertinent pour juger de la « qualité » des institutions académiques, guider le choix des étudiants ou des familles, ou promouvoir des réformes du système d’enseignement supérieur.

Suggested Citation

  • Billaut, Jean-Charles & Bouyssou, Denis & Vincke, Philippe, 2010. "Faut-il croire le classement de Shangaï ?," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 8.
    • Handle: RePEc:rvr:journl:2010:9016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://regulation.revues.org/9016
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://regulation.revues.org/pdf/9016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
    2. Jill Johnes, 2006. "Measuring Efficiency: A Comparison of Multilevel Modelling and Data Envelopment Analysis in the Context of Higher Education," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 75-104, April.
    3. Michel Zitt & Suzy Ramanana-Rahary & Elise Bassecoulard, 2005. "Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(2), pages 373-401, April.
    4. Denis Bouyssou, 1989. "Modelling Inaccurate Determination, Uncertainty, Imprecision Using Multiple Criteria," Post-Print hal-02920179, HAL.
    5. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    6. L Cherchye & W Moesen & N Rogge & T Van Puyenbroeck & M Saisana & A Saltelli & R Liska & S Tarantola, 2008. "Creating composite indicators with DEA and robustness analysis: the case of the Technology Achievement Index," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(2), pages 239-251, February.
    7. Marie-Laure Bougnol & José Dulá, 2006. "Validating DEA as a ranking tool: An application of DEA to assess performance in higher education," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 339-365, July.
    8. Răzvan V. Florian, 2007. "Irreproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(1), pages 25-32, July.
    9. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    10. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    11. Lawrence Phillips & Carlos Bana e Costa, 2007. "Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 51-68, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.
    2. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2009. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? An MCDM view," Working Papers hal-00877050, HAL.
    3. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    4. Alexandr Gedranovich & Mykhaylo Salnykov, 2012. "Productivity analysis of Belarusian higher education system," BEROC Working Paper Series 16, Belarusian Economic Research and Outreach Center (BEROC).
    5. Khatab Alqararah, 2023. "Assessing the robustness of composite indicators: the case of the Global Innovation Index," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Feng Li & Qingyuan Zhu & Liang Liang, 2019. "A new data envelopment analysis based approach for fixed cost allocation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 347-372, March.
    7. Agnes Gold & Stefan Gold, 2019. "Drivers of Farm Efficiency and Their Potential for Development in a Changing Agricultural Setting in Kerala, India," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 855-880, September.
    8. Annalina Sarra & Eugenia Nissi, 2020. "A Spatial Composite Indicator for Human and Ecosystem Well-Being in the Italian Urban Areas," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 353-377, April.
    9. Bougnol, M.-L. & Dulá, J.H. & Estellita Lins, M.P. & Moreira da Silva, A.C., 2010. "Enhancing standard performance practices with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 33-45, February.
    10. Barbero, Javier & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Zofío, José L., 2021. "Is more always better? On the relevance of decreasing returns to scale on innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    11. Tavares, Rafael Santos & Angulo-Meza, Lidia & Sant'Anna, Annibal Parracho, 2021. "A proposed multistage evaluation approach for Higher Education Institutions based on network Data envelopment analysis: A Brazilian experience," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. Kristof De Witte & Laura López-Torres, 2017. "Efficiency in education: a review of literature and a way forward," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(4), pages 339-363, April.
    13. F A F Ferreira & S P Santos & P M M Rodrigues, 2011. "Adding value to bank branch performance evaluation using cognitive maps and MCDA: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(7), pages 1320-1333, July.
    14. José França & João Figueiredo & Jair Lapa, 2010. "A DEA methodology to evaluate the impact of information asymmetry on the efficiency of not-for-profit organizations with an application to higher education in Brazil," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 39-56, January.
    15. Corrado Lo Storto, 2016. "Ecological Efficiency Based Ranking of Cities: A Combined DEA Cross-Efficiency and Shannon’s Entropy Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-29, January.
    16. Tzeremes, Nickolaos & Halkos, George, 2010. "A DEA approach for measuring university departments’ efficiency," MPRA Paper 24029, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Jie Wu & Ganggang Zhang & Qingyuan Zhu & Zhixiang Zhou, 2020. "An efficiency analysis of higher education institutions in China from a regional perspective considering the external environmental impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 57-70, January.
    18. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2015. "Efficiency of the banking system in Vietnam under financial liberalization," OSF Preprints qsf6d, Center for Open Science.
    19. Angel García Correas & Manuel Larran Jorge, 2010. "Análisis de diferentes medidas de la eficiencia investigadora y factores explicativos en las universidades públicas españolas," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 5, in: María Jesús Mancebón-Torrubia & Domingo P. Ximénez-de-Embún & José María Gómez-Sancho & Gregorio Gim (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 5, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 36, pages 703-732, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    20. Hatefi, S.M. & Torabi, S.A., 2010. "A common weight MCDA-DEA approach to construct composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 114-120, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    aide multicritère à la décision; classement de Shangaï; enseignement supérieur; modèles d’évaluation; evaluation models; higher education; multiple criteria decision analysis; Shanghai ranking; ayuda multicriterios a la decisión; clasificación de Shangai; enseñanza superior; modelos de evaluación;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • H52 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Education

    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:rvr:journl:2010:9016. 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: Pascal Seppecher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://theorie-regulation.org/ .

    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.