Economic performance measures for evaluating government-sponsored research

Scientometrics

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 325-342

  Link, A N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041965033     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02129598     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. 2 provides an excellent and more complete discussion of the history of U.S. science and technology policy.
2. M. M. CROW, Science and technology policy in the United States: Trading in the 1950 model, Science and Public Policy, 21 (1994) 202-212.
3. L. B. LAVE, The Strategy of Social Regulations: Decision Frameworks for Policy, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., 1981.
4. E. ORMALA, Nordic experiences of the evaluation of technical research and development, Research Policy, 18 (1989) 333-342.
5. E. ORMALA, Impact assessment: European experience of qualitative methods and practices, Evaluation Review, 18 (1994) 41-51.
6. V. K. SMITH, A conceptual overview of the foundation of benefit-cost analysis. In: J. D. BENTKOVER, V. T. COVELLO, J. MUMPOWER (Eds), Benefit Assessment: The State of the Art, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 1986, pp. 13-34.
7. D. W. PEARCE, C. A. NASH, The Social Appraisal of Projects: A Text in Cost-Benefit Analysis, John Wiley, New York, 1981.
8. M. ZELNEY, Multiple Criteria Decisionmaking, John Wiley, New York, 1982.
9. L. A. Cox, Jr., Theory of regulatory benefits assessment: Econometric and expressed preference approaches. In: J. D. BENTKOVER, V. T. COVELLO, J. MUMPOWER (Eds), Benefit Assessment: The State of the Art, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 1986, pp. 85-159.
10. R. G. CUMMINGS, L.A. COX, Jr., A. M. Freemen III, General methods for benefits assessments. In: J. D. Bentkover, V. T. Covello, J. Mumpower (Eds), Benefit Assessment: The State of the Art, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 1986, pp. 161-191.
11. R. N. Kostoff, Co-word analysis. In: B. BOZEMAN, J. MELKERS (Eds), Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1993, pp. 63-78.
12. J. MELKERS, Bibliometrics as a tool for analysis of R&D impacts. In: B. BOZEMAN, J. MELKERS (Eds), Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1993, pp. 43-61.
13. M. PAPADAKIS, Patents and the evaluation of R&D. In:B. BOZEMAN, J. MELKERS (Eds), Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1993, pp. 99-121.
14. 15 provides an excellent synopsis of the history of benefit-cost analysis, beginning with its first application to implement the requirements of the River and Harbor Act of 1902.
15. J. T. CAMPEN, Benefit, Costs, and Beyond: The Political Economy of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, Mass., 1986.
16. 17 for examples of the application of benefit-cost analysis to research programs sponsored by the National Institute of Standards and Technology within the U.S. Department of Commerce.
17. A. N. LINK, Evaluating Public Sector Research and Development, Praeger Publishers, Westport, Conn., 1996.
18. 17 case studies follow this guideline for illustrative purposes. However, it remains subjective, even if this guideline is correct, as to what long-term rate to use - the rate in effect in year t=0, the rate in effect when benefits first appear and are first realized in year t=8, the rate in effect when all benefits are thought to be realized at the end of year t=12, or the rate in effect when the evaluation is conducted. Thus, the origin in time for the analysis may be very important.
19. R. F. MIKESELL, The Rate of Discount for Evaluating Public Projects, American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C., 1977.
20. A. N. LINK, On the classification of R&D, Research Policy, 25 (1996) 397-401.
21. Examples include Refs 22-24.
22. A. N. LINK, Payoffs from basic research: Dead ends, detours, and redirections. In: J. SOMMERS (Ed), An Agenda for Science Policy Research, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1987, pp. 1-14.
23. A. N. LINK, D. J. TEECE, W. F. FINAN, Estimating the benefits from collaboration: The case of SEMATECH, Review of Industrial Organization, forthcoming, 1996.
24. M. PAPADAKIS, A. N. LINK, Measuring the unmeasurable: Cost-benefit analysis for new business start-ups and basic research transfers, mimeographed, 1996.
25. 26 The references related to the fundamental theory underlying the derivation are noted therein.
26. A. N. LINK, Technological Change and Productivity Growth, Harwood Academic Publishers, London, 1987.
27. 26 discusses applications of other mathematical forms for production functions.
28. D. P. LEYDEN, A. N. LINK, Government's Role in Innovation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1992.
29. A. N. LINK, Basic research and productivity increase in manufacturing: Additional evidence, American Economic Review, 71 (1981) 1111-1112.
30. E. MANSFIELD, Basic research and productivity increase in manufacturing, American Economic Review, 70 (1980) 863-873.
31. G. TASSEY, Technological Infrastructure and Competitive Position, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1992.
32. 33 the application of this evaluation approach generally retreats to a case study analysis that is based on expressed preference data. In this sense, the topic is subsumed in the discussions above.
33. H. A. AVERCH, Economic approaches to the evaluation of research, Evaluation Review, 18 (1994) 77-88.