IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ico/wpaper/149.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wie viel Wettbewerb wollen wir (uns leisten)? Zur Verwettbewerblichung der Universitaeten in Oesterreich und darueber hinaus

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan Puehringer

    (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria)

Abstract

In den letzten Jahren hat sich ein deutlicher Trend abgezeichnet: Universitaeten sind zunehmend von vielfaeltigen Wettbewerbsformen durchdrungen, die eine zentrale Rolle in der Organisation des Wissenschaftssystems spielen. Dieser Beitrag beleuchtet die Verwettbewerblichung der Wissensproduktion aus der Perspektive der Kritischen Wettbewerbsforschung. Es wird untersucht, wie Wettbewerbslogiken nicht nur die Organisation der Wissenschaft beeinflussen, sondern ueber die Verbreitung von quantitativen Leistungsindikatoren zur Wissenschaftsmessung auch die Selbstwahrnehmung der Forscher:innen als Wettbewerbssubjekte formen. Die Einfuehrung des Universitaetsgesetzes 2002 in Oesterreich markierte einen Schritt zur Autonomie der Universitaeten und foerderte die Wettbewerbsorientierung. Drittmittelfinanzierte Forschung hat zugenommen, was zu prekaeren Arbeitsbedingungen fuehrt. Der Beitrag skizziert die Genese der Wettbewerbsoekologie in Oesterreich und beleuchtet insbesondere die oekonomischen, sozialen und epistemologischen "Kosten des Wettbewerbs". Der Beitrag schliesst mit dem Aufruf zu einer integrativen Betrachtung der Vor- und Nachteile von Wettbewerb in der Wissenschaft, um zukunftsgerichtete wissenschaftspolitische Debatten zu foerdern.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan Puehringer, 2023. "Wie viel Wettbewerb wollen wir (uns leisten)? Zur Verwettbewerblichung der Universitaeten in Oesterreich und darueber hinaus," ICAE Working Papers 149, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
  • Handle: RePEc:ico:wpaper:149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jku.at/fileadmin/gruppen/108/ICAE_Working_Papers/wp149.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Park & Erin Leahey & Russell J. Funk, 2023. "Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time," Nature, Nature, vol. 613(7942), pages 138-144, January.
    2. Melanie Wiener & Daniela Maresch & Robert J. Breitenecker, 2020. "The shift towards entrepreneurial universities and the relevance of third-party funding of business and economics units in Austria: a research note," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 345-363, April.
    3. Shannon Hall, 2023. "A mental-health crisis is gripping science — toxic research culture is to blame," Nature, Nature, vol. 617(7962), pages 666-668, May.
    4. Freese, Jeremy & Peterson, David, 2017. "Replication in Social Science," SocArXiv 5bck9, Center for Open Science.
    5. Björn Hammarfelt & Alexander D. Rushforth, 2017. "Indicators as judgment devices: An empirical study of citizen bibliometrics in research evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 169-180.
    6. Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan & Gleibs, Ilka Helene, 2023. "A social-psychological examination of academic precarity as an organizational practice and subjective experience," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117269, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Chris Woolston, 2020. "Postdocs under pressure: ‘Can I even do this any more?’," Nature, Nature, vol. 587(7835), pages 689-692, November.
    8. Krist Vaesen & Joel Katzav, 2017. "How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-11, September.
    9. Freese, Jeremy & Peterson, David, 2017. "Replication in Social Science," SocArXiv 5bck9_v1, Center for Open Science.
    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. Franz Neuberger & Martin Bujard & Tobias Rüttenauer, 2022. "Where does public childcare boost female labor force participation? Exploring geographical heterogeneity across Germany 2007–2017," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 46(24), pages 693-722.
    2. Fanelli, Daniele, 2020. "Metascientific reproducibility patterns revealed by informatic measure of knowledge," MetaArXiv 5vnhj, Center for Open Science.
    3. Martin Kreidl & Zuzana Žilinčíková, 2023. "Adult children’s union type and contact with mothers: A replication," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(23), pages 641-680.
    4. Fišar, Miloš & Greiner, Ben & Huber, Christoph & Katok, Elena & Ozkes, Ali & Collaboration, Management Science Reproducibility, 2023. "Reproducibility in Management Science," OSF Preprints mydzv_v1, Center for Open Science.
    5. Thompson, Phillip S. & Klotz, Anthony C., 2022. "Led by curiosity and responding with voice: The influence of leader displays of curiosity and leader gender on follower reactions of psychological safety and voice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    6. Daniel T. L. Shek & Diya Dou & Xiaoqin Zhu & Xiang Li & Lindan Tan, 2022. "Materialism, Egocentrism and Delinquent Behavior in Chinese Adolescents in Mainland China: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Michel Herzig, 2020. "Mediating Factors of Family Structure and Early Home-leaving: A Replication and Extension of van den Berg, Kalmijn, and Leopold (2018)," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 36(4), pages 643-674, September.
    8. Jack I. Richter & Pankaj C. Patel, 2022. "Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the hours lost by self-employed racial minorities: evidence from Brazil," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 769-805, February.
    9. Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Fiala, Nathan & Neubauer, Florian, 2023. "Do economists replicate?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 219-232.
    10. Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Magnus, 2023. "A framework for evaluating reproducibility and replicability in economics," I4R Discussion Paper Series 38, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    11. Mats Alvesson & Jörgen Sandberg, 2020. "The Problematizing Review: A Counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg’s Argument for Integrative Reviews," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(6), pages 1290-1304, September.
    12. Luis Alfonso Dau & Grazia D. Santangelo & Arjen Witteloostuijn, 2022. "Replication studies in international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(2), pages 215-230, March.
    13. Yuyan Jiang & Xueli Liu, 2023. "A construction and empirical research of the journal disruption index based on open citation data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 3935-3958, July.
    14. Andrew G.H. Thompson & Oliver Escobar & Jennifer J. Roberts & Stephen Elstub & Niccole M. Pamphilis, 2021. "The Importance of Context and the Effect of Information and Deliberation on Opinion Change Regarding Environmental Issues in Citizens’ Juries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, September.
    15. Willy Bolander & Nawar N. Chaker & Alec Pappas & Daniel R. Bradbury, 2021. "Operationalizing salesperson performance with secondary data: aligning practice, scholarship, and theory," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 462-481, May.
    16. Antonia Krefeld-Schwalb & Benjamin Scheibehenne, 2023. "Tighter nets for smaller fishes? Mapping the development of statistical practices in consumer research between 2008 and 2020," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 351-365, September.
    17. Fanelli, Daniele, 2022. "The "Tau" of Science - How to Measure, Study, and Integrate Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge," MetaArXiv 67sak, Center for Open Science.
    18. Ugofilippo Basellini, 2024. "Open science practices in demographic research: An appraisal," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 50(43), pages 1265-1280.
    19. Abramson, Corey & Li, Zhuofan, 2024. "Ethnography and Machine Learning: Synergies and New Directions," OSF Preprints jvpbw, Center for Open Science.
    20. Michael John Bartlett & Feyza Nur Arslan & Adriana Bankston & Sarvenaz Sarabipour, 2021. "Ten simple rules to improve academic work–life balance," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ico:wpaper:149. 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: Teresa Griesebner The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Teresa Griesebner to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/igjkuat.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.