IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare03/57889.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation Of Collaborative Research And Development: Insights From A Survey Of Sugar Industry Researchers

Author

Listed:
  • Henderson, Tracy M.

Abstract

The Australian agricultural research and development (R&D) sector faces many challenges associated with the trend to increased collaborative research as promoted by the Cooperative Research Centre Program. Analysis of the results of an electronic survey of researchers involved in the sugar industry highlights economic, managerial, and sociological challenges associated with collaborative research. Researchers’ perceptions of the usefulness of a range of economic and non-economic evaluation techniques are also highlighted. It is shown that economic evaluation is appropriate for resource allocation and impact assessment purposes but is of limited value in monitoring and improving the process of collaborative research. A systems-based approach to the evaluation of collaborative R&D incorporating principles from economics, management, and sociology is promoted as an appropriate alternative that could contribute to improved efficiency and effectiveness of collaborative research activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Henderson, Tracy M., 2003. "Evaluation Of Collaborative Research And Development: Insights From A Survey Of Sugar Industry Researchers," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57889, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare03:57889
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.57889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/57889/files/2003_henderson.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.57889?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henderson, Tracy M., 2002. "Evaluating the performance of collaborative research and development activities," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125110, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Henderson, Tracy M., 2001. "R&D expenditure, R&D evaluation, and the advent of collaborative R&D with reference to the Australian sugar industry," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 125654, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    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. Henderson, Tracy M., 2002. "Evaluating the performance of collaborative research and development activities," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125110, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Daniela Filippo & Pablo Sastrón-Toledo, 2023. "Influence of research on open science in the public policy sphere," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1995-2017, March.
    3. Manning, Stephan, 2017. "The rise of project network organizations: Building core teams and flexible partner pools for interorganizational projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1399-1415.
    4. Qingzhou Luo & Jianhong Cecilia Xia & Gaby Haddow & Michele Willson & Jun Yang, 2018. "Does distance hinder the collaboration between Australian universities in the humanities, arts and social sciences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 695-715, May.
    5. Antje Klitkou & Stian Nygaard & Martin Meyer, 2007. "Tracking techno-science networks: A case study of fuel cells and related hydrogen technology R&D in Norway," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 491-518, February.
    6. Zhu, Yongjun & Kim, Donghun & Jiang, Ting & Zhao, Yi & He, Jiangen & Chen, Xinyi & Lou, Wen, 2024. "Dependency, reciprocity, and informal mentorship in predicting long-term research collaboration: A co-authorship matrix-based multivariate time series analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    7. Leonardo Reyes-Gonzalez & Claudia N. Gonzalez-Brambila & Francisco Veloso, 2016. "Using co-authorship and citation analysis to identify research groups: a new way to assess performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1171-1191, September.
    8. Hayashi, Takayuki, 2003. "Effect of R&D programmes on the formation of university-industry-government networks: comparative analysis of Japanese R&D programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1421-1442, September.
    9. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    10. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    11. Eustache Mêgnigbêto, 2018. "Correlation Between Transmission Power and Some Indicators Used to Measure the Knowledge-Based Economy: Case of Six OECD Countries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(4), pages 1168-1183, December.
    12. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    13. Per O. Seglen & Dag W. Aksnes, 2000. "Scientific Productivity and Group Size: A Bibliometric Analysis of Norwegian Microbiological Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 125-143, August.
    14. Wah Yun Low & Kwan Hoong Ng & M. A. Kabir & Ai Peng Koh & Janaki Sinnasamy, 2014. "Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1521-1533, February.
    15. Craig Boardman & Barry Bozeman, 2006. "Implementing a 'bottom-up,' multi-sector research collaboration: The case of the Texas air quality study," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 51-69.
    16. Jesús Rey-Rocha & Irene López-Navarro & M. Teresa Antonio-García, 2015. "Opening doors to basic-clinical collaboration and translational research will improve researchers’ performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2057-2069, December.
    17. Hoekman, Jarno & Rake, Bastian, 2024. "Geography of authorship: How geography shapes authorship attribution in big team science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    18. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele, 2023. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    19. Hajibabaei, Anahita & Schiffauerova, Andrea & Ebadi, Ashkan, 2022. "Gender-specific patterns in the artificial intelligence scientific ecosystem," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    20. Mohammadi, Ali & Broström, Anders & Franzoni, Chiara, 2015. "Work Force Composition and Innovation: How Diversity in Employees’ Ethnical and Disciplinary Backgrounds Facilitates Knowledge Re-combination," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 413, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    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:ags:aare03:57889. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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.