IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wai/econwp/08-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Research Assessment Exercises Raise the Returns to Publication Quality? Evidence from the New Zealand Market for Academic Economists

Author

Listed:
  • John Gibson

    (University of Waikato)

  • John Tressler

    (University of Waikato)

  • David L. Anderson

    (Queen's University)

Abstract

Many countries have introduced research assessment exercises to help measure and raise the quality of research in their university sector. But there is little empirical evidence on how these exercises, such as the Quality Evaluation of the Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) in New Zealand and the recently aborted Research Quality Framework (RQF) in Australia, affect the signals that researchers observe in the academic labour market. Since these assessments aim to raise research quality, individual academics should perceive rising returns to publication quality at the expense of the returns to quantity. Data we collected on the rank and publication records of New Zealand academic economists prior to the introduction of the PBRF and just after the second assessment round are used to estimate the changing returns to the quantity and quality of journal articles.

Suggested Citation

  • John Gibson & John Tressler & David L. Anderson, 2008. "Do Research Assessment Exercises Raise the Returns to Publication Quality? Evidence from the New Zealand Market for Academic Economists," Working Papers in Economics 08/11, University of Waikato.
    • Handle: RePEc:wai:econwp:08/11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.its.waikato.ac.nz/wai/econwp/0811.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. David L. Anderson & John Tresler, 2008. "An Analysis of New Zealand Economists' Research Output 2000-2006," Working Papers in Economics 08/20, University of Waikato, revised 31 Dec 2008.
    2. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The New Zealand performance-based research fund and its impact on publication activity in economics," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 1-11, September.
    3. Robert A. Buckle & John Creedy, 2019. "The evolution of research quality in New Zealand universities as measured by the performance-based research fund process," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(2), pages 144-165, May.
    4. Robert A. Buckle and John Creedy, 2018. "The Impact on Research Quality of Performance-Based Funding: The Case of New Zealand’s PBRF Scheme," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 25-48.
    5. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2011. "Ranking Economics Departments In Terms Of Residual Productivity: New Zealand Economics Departments, 2000–2006," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 157-168, December.
    6. Robert A. Buckle and John Creedy, 2018. "The Impact on Research Quality of Performance-Based Funding: The Case of New Zealand’s PBRF Scheme," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 25-48.
    7. Robert A. Buckle & John Creedy, 2019. "The evolution of research quality in New Zealand universities as measured by the performance-based research fund process," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(2), pages 144-165, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    research assessment; PBRF; academic labor market; research quality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education
    • J5 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining

    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:wai:econwp:08/11. 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: Geua Boe-Gibson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaknz.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.