Research funding systems in Australia, New Zealand and the UK: Policy settings and perceived effects

Policy and politics

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 379-398

  Lewis, Jenny M ^a   Ross, Sandy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Australia; PBRF; RAE; Research funding systems; Research policy

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; POLICY MAKING; RESEARCH;

AUCKLAND; AUSTRALIA; BIRMINGHAM [ENGLAND]; ENGLAND; MELBOURNE; NEW ZEALAND; NORTH ISLAND; UNITED KINGDOM; VICTORIA [AUSTRALIA];

EID: 80051570556     PISSN: 03055736     EISSN: 14708442     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1332/030557310X520270     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Adams, J. (2008) Strategic review of the Performance-Based Research Fund, Wellington: Tertiary Education Commission (www.tec.govt.nz/upload/downloads/pbrfreport-2008-review.pdf).
2. ARC (Australian Research Council) (2008) ERA indicator principles, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia (www.arc.gov.au/pdf/ERA_Indicator_Principles. pdf).
3. Archambault, É. and Gagné, E.V. (2004) The use of bibliometrics in the social sciences and humanities (science-metrix final report), Montreal: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC).
4. Auckland University of Technology (2009) AUT history 1995-2000, Auckland: Auckland University (www.aut.ac.nz/about-aut/aut-timeline).
5. Australian Government (2010) Higher Education Support Act 2003, Compilation version (www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/framelodgmentattachments/07D244D513589C29CA2576FF00144CBC).
6. AUT (Association of University Teachers) (2004) UK academic staff 2002-3: Gender and research activity in the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise, London: AUT.
7. Bakker, L., Boston, J., Campbell, L. and Smyth, R. (eds) (2006) Evaluating the Performance-Based Research Fund: Framing the debate, Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of Wellington.
8. Barker, K. (2007) 'The UK Research Assessment Exercise: the evolution of a national research evaluation system', Research Evaluation, vol 16, no 1: 3-12.
9. Bernard, G.W. (2000) 'History and Research Assessment Exercises', Oxford Review of Education, vol 26, no 1: 95-106.
10. Biglan, A. (1973) 'The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas', Journal of Applied Psychology, vol 57, no 3: 195-203.
11. Boston, J., Mischewski, B. and Smyth, R. (2005) 'Performance-based research fund - implications for research in the social sciences and social policy', Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, no 24: 55-84.
12. Butler, L. (2002) 'A list of published papers is no measure of value', Nature, vol 419, no 6910: 877.
13. Butler, L. (2003) 'Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications: the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts', Research Policy, vol 32, no 1: 143-55.
14. Butler, L. and RAND Europe (2008) Options for defining normalisation fields, London: Higher Education Funding Council (www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/resources/Options.pdf).
15. Cameron, N. (2007) 'Impact factors and research quality', Annals of Human Biology, vol 34, no 1: 13-15.
16. Cochrane, W., Law, M. and Ryan, T. (2005) The 2003 experience: A survey of academic staff at the University of Waikato, Report prepared for the Association of University Staff, Waikato: Centre for Labour and Trade Union Studies, University of Waikato.
17. Curtis, B. (2005) 'La perruque in university work (in the humanities and social sciences)', Asia-Pacific Researchers in Organization Studies 11th International Colloquium (APROS 11), Melbourne: 65-76.
18. Dawkins, J. (1988) Higher education: A policy statement, Department of Education, Employment and Training, Canberra: AGPS.
19. Del Favero, M. (2005) 'The social dimension of academic discipline as a discriminator of academic deans' administrative behaviors', Review of Higher Education, vol 29, no 1: 69-96.
20. DIISR (Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) (2009a) About Research Block Grants, Canberra, Australia (www.innovation.gov.au/ScienceAndResearch/programs_funding/Pages/About_RBG.aspx).
21. DIISR (2009b) Research Block Grants - calculation methodology, Canberra, Australia (www.innovation.gov.au/ScienceAndResearch/programs_funding/Pages/RBG_CalculationMethodology.aspx).
22. DIISR (2010) Australian Research Council (ARC) fact sheet, Canberra, Australia (www.innovation.gov.au/Section/AboutDIISR/FactSheets/Pages/AustralianResearchCouncil%28ARC%29FactSheet.aspx).
23. Donovan, C. (2005a) 'The governance of social science and everyday epistemology', Public Administration, vol 83, no 3: 597-615.
24. Donovan, C. (2005b) A review of current Australian and international practice in measuring the quality and impact of publicly funded research in the humanities, arts and social sciences, Research Evaluation and Policy Project (REPP), Discussion Paper 05/3, Canberra: Research School of Social Sciences, ANU.
25. Donovan, C. (2007) 'The qualitative future of research evaluation', Science and Public Policy, vol 34, no 8: 585-97.
26. Eastwood, D. (2007) Future framework for research assessment and funding, Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) circular letter 06/2007, London: HEFCE (www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/circlets/2007/cl06_07/).
27. Elton, L. (2000) 'The UK Research Assessment Exercise: unintended consequences', Higher Education Quarterly, vol 54, no 3: 274-83.
28. Fletcher, C., Boden, R., Kent, J. and Tinson, J. (2007) 'Performing women: the gendered dimensions of the UK new research economy', Gender, Work and Organization, vol 14, no 5: 433-53.
29. French, N.J., Massy, W.F. and Young, K. (2001) 'Research assessment in Hong Kong', Higher Education, vol 42, no 1: 35-46.
30. Frith, S. (1999) 'Research matters', Critical Quarterly, vol 41, no 3: 123-39.
31. Geuna, A. and Martin, B.R. (2001) University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison, Brighton: Science and Technology Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex.
32. Hare, P. (2003) 'The United Kingdom's Research Assessment Exercise: impact on institutions, departments, individuals', Higher Education Management and Policy, vol 15, no 2: 43-62.
33. HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England) (2009a) Research Excellence Framework, London: HEFCE (www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/).
34. HEFCE (2009b) Recurrent grants for 2009-10, London: HEFCE (www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2009/09_08/#exec).
35. Henkel, M. (1999) 'The modernisation of research evaluation: the case of the UK', Higher Education, vol 38, no 1: 105-22.
36. Hicks, D. (2004) 'The four literatures of social science', in H.F. Moed, W. Glanzel and U. Schmoch (eds) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp 473-96), Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
37. Hicks, D. (2009) 'Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation', Higher Education, vol 57, no 4: 393-404.
38. Johnston, R. (2005) 'On preparing for more subjective judgements: RAE 2008', Perspectives, vol 9, no 4: 115-20.
39. Levene, M. and Oliver, R. (2005) 'A survey of clinical academic staffing in paediatrics and child health in the UK', Archives of Disease in Childhood, vol 90: 450-3.
40. Lewis, J. (2000) 'Funding social science research in academia', Social Policy and Administration, vol 34, no 4: 365-76.
41. Lewis, J.M. (2007) 'Intellectual curiosity, disciplinary traditions and performance frameworks: understanding academic networks', The Australian Sociological Association/Sociology Association of New Zealand, Joint Conference, Auckland, 4-7 December, published in B. Curtis, S. Matthewman and T. McIntosh (eds) Public sociologies: Lessons and trans-Tasman comparisons, TASA/SAANZ Joint Conference Proceedings, Department of Sociology, The University of Auckland.
42. Lewis, J.M. (2010) Connecting and cooperating: Social capital and public policy, Sydney: UNSW Press.
43. Loftus, A. (2006) 'RAE-ification and the consciousness of the academic', Area, vol 38, no 1: 110-12.
44. Marginson, S. (1997a) Educating Australia: Government, economy and citizen since 1960, Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
45. Marginson, S. (1997b) Markets in education, St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.
46. Matthews, R. and AUT (Association of University Teachers) (2005) 'Exercises in assessment: what the NZ and UK versions teach us', NTEU Advocate, vol 12, no 1: 30-4.
47. Morgan, K.J. (2004) 'The research assessment exercise in English universities, 2001', Higher Education, vol 48: 461-82.
48. NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council) (2010) NHMRC research funding dataset 2000-2009, Canberra: NHMRC (www.nhmrc.gov.au/ grants/dataset/rmis/index.htm).
49. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2008) Science, technology and industry outlook 2008, Paris: OECD
50. Pilbeam, C. (2006) 'Generating additional revenue streams in UK universities: an analysis of variation between disciplines and institutions', Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol 28, no 3: 297-311.
51. Ramsden, P. (1994) 'Describing and explaining research productivity', Higher Education, vol 28, no 2: 207-26.
52. Ramsden, P. (1999) 'Predicting institutional research performance from published indicators: a test of a classification of Australian university types', Higher Education, vol 37, no 4: 341-58.
53. RCUK (Research Councils UK) (2010) Science budget, Swindon: RCUK (www. rcuk.ac.uk/aboutrcs/funding/scibudget).
54. Roberts, Sir G. (2003) Review of research assessment, Oxford: Higher Education Funding Council.
55. Roberts, P. (2007) 'Neoliberalism, performativity and research', Review of Education, vol 53: 349-65.
56. Sharp, S. and Coleman, S. (2005) 'Ratings in the Research Assessment Exercise 2001 - the patterns of university status and panel membership', Higher Education Quarterly, vol 59, no 2: 153-71.
57. Sikes, P. (2006) 'Working in a "new" university: in the shadow of the Research Assessment Exercise?', Studies in Higher Education, vol 31, no 5: 555-68.
58. Strachan, G. (2008) 'Challenges to gender equity for university staff ', NTEU Advocate, vol 15, no 1: 24-5.
59. TEC (Tertiary Education Commission) (2009) Performance-based research fund (www. tec.govt.nz/Funding/Fund-finder/Performance-Based-Research-Fund-PBRF-/, last accessed 12 July 2010).
60. Traynor, M. and Rafferty, A.M. (1999) 'Nursing and the Research Assessment Exercise: past, present and future', Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol 30, no 1: 186-92.
61. Universitas 21 (2009) 'About Universitas 21' (www.universitas21.com/about.html).
62. Visser, G. (2009) 'Tourism geographies and the South African National Research Foundation's researcher rating system: international connections and local disjunctures', Tourism Geographies, vol 11, no 1: 43-72.