Entering an era of research ranking: Will innovation and diversity survive?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

There is something fundamentally absurd about the idea of ranking research. At thesame time, no one can seriously argue that all research is equal in importance andquality. Either way, we are doubtlessly witnessing a dramatic change in themanagement and organisation of research. One aspect of this change is a movetowards the ranking of research. In the United Kingdom, the Research AssessmentExercise (RAE) has been carried out on six occasions, with plans for another. Further,the Australian Government is in the process of introducing the so‐called Excellence inResearch for Australia (ERA). These are just some examples of a widespread trendaffecting research around the world.In this article, we examine, compare and discuss two research ranking schemes; theUK’s RAE, and Australia’s ERA. First, an overview is given of the two schemes. Thisis followed by a comparative part focused on identifying key similarities anddifferences between the schemes. We then move on to analysing the relevance of theindicators of ‘research quality’ used in the schemes. Finally, we explore some of thenegative consequences that may follow research ranking exercises, and propose apossible way forward.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)173-191
Number of pages19
JournalBond Law Review
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009

Fingerprint

ranking
innovation

Cite this

@article{4e638ab0a3ae426389b0b8412de5e165,
title = "Entering an era of research ranking: Will innovation and diversity survive?",
abstract = "There is something fundamentally absurd about the idea of ranking research. At thesame time, no one can seriously argue that all research is equal in importance andquality. Either way, we are doubtlessly witnessing a dramatic change in themanagement and organisation of research. One aspect of this change is a movetowards the ranking of research. In the United Kingdom, the Research AssessmentExercise (RAE) has been carried out on six occasions, with plans for another. Further,the Australian Government is in the process of introducing the so‐called Excellence inResearch for Australia (ERA). These are just some examples of a widespread trendaffecting research around the world.In this article, we examine, compare and discuss two research ranking schemes; theUK’s RAE, and Australia’s ERA. First, an overview is given of the two schemes. Thisis followed by a comparative part focused on identifying key similarities anddifferences between the schemes. We then move on to analysing the relevance of theindicators of ‘research quality’ used in the schemes. Finally, we explore some of thenegative consequences that may follow research ranking exercises, and propose apossible way forward.",
author = "Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B} and Paul White",
year = "2009",
doi = "http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=blr",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "173--191",
journal = "Bond Law Review",
issn = "1033-4505",
publisher = "Bond University Press",
number = "3",

}

Entering an era of research ranking : Will innovation and diversity survive? / Svantesson, Dan Jerker B; White, Paul.

In: Bond Law Review, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2009, p. 173-191.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Entering an era of research ranking

T2 - Will innovation and diversity survive?

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

AU - White, Paul

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - There is something fundamentally absurd about the idea of ranking research. At thesame time, no one can seriously argue that all research is equal in importance andquality. Either way, we are doubtlessly witnessing a dramatic change in themanagement and organisation of research. One aspect of this change is a movetowards the ranking of research. In the United Kingdom, the Research AssessmentExercise (RAE) has been carried out on six occasions, with plans for another. Further,the Australian Government is in the process of introducing the so‐called Excellence inResearch for Australia (ERA). These are just some examples of a widespread trendaffecting research around the world.In this article, we examine, compare and discuss two research ranking schemes; theUK’s RAE, and Australia’s ERA. First, an overview is given of the two schemes. Thisis followed by a comparative part focused on identifying key similarities anddifferences between the schemes. We then move on to analysing the relevance of theindicators of ‘research quality’ used in the schemes. Finally, we explore some of thenegative consequences that may follow research ranking exercises, and propose apossible way forward.

AB - There is something fundamentally absurd about the idea of ranking research. At thesame time, no one can seriously argue that all research is equal in importance andquality. Either way, we are doubtlessly witnessing a dramatic change in themanagement and organisation of research. One aspect of this change is a movetowards the ranking of research. In the United Kingdom, the Research AssessmentExercise (RAE) has been carried out on six occasions, with plans for another. Further,the Australian Government is in the process of introducing the so‐called Excellence inResearch for Australia (ERA). These are just some examples of a widespread trendaffecting research around the world.In this article, we examine, compare and discuss two research ranking schemes; theUK’s RAE, and Australia’s ERA. First, an overview is given of the two schemes. Thisis followed by a comparative part focused on identifying key similarities anddifferences between the schemes. We then move on to analysing the relevance of theindicators of ‘research quality’ used in the schemes. Finally, we explore some of thenegative consequences that may follow research ranking exercises, and propose apossible way forward.

U2 - http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=blr

DO - http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=blr

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 173

EP - 191

JO - Bond Law Review

JF - Bond Law Review

SN - 1033-4505

IS - 3

ER -