Research Governance and the Role of Evaluation: A Comparative Study

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 583-598

  Molas Gallart, Jordi ^a  

^a INGENIO CSIC UPV Technical University of Valencia   (Spain)

Author keywords

governance; research evaluation; research policy; Spain; United Kingdom

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869060966     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: 15570878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1098214012450938     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. ab Iorwerth A.Methods of evaluating university research around the world. Ottawa, ON: Department of Finance; 2005:.
2. Anderson I.Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making.Public Administration. 2002;80:1-22.
3. Arnold E.Evaluating research and innovation policy: A systems world needs systems evaluations.Research Evaluation. 2004;13:3-17.
4. Barker K.The UK research assessment exercise: The evolution of a national research evaluation system.Research Evaluation. 2007;16:3-12.
5. Bustelo M.The potential role of standards and guidelines in the development of an evaluation culture in Spain.Evaluation. 2006;12:437-453.
6. Chelimsky E.The SAGE handbook of evaluation. Shaw I. F.Greene J. C.Mark M. M., ed. London, England: Thousand Oaks; 2006:33-55.
7. Chen H.-T.Practical program evaluation. Assessing and improving planning, implementation and effectiveness. London, England: Thousand Oaks; 2005:.
8. Coryn C. L. S.Evaluation of researchers and their research: Toward making the implicit explicit. Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University; 2007:.
9. Coryn C. L. S.,Hattie J. A.,Scriven M.,Hartmann D. J.Models and mechanisms for evaluation government-funded research: An international comparison.American Journal of Evaluation. 2007;28:437-457.
10. Cozzens S. E.Learning form science and technology evaluation. Experiences from the United States and Europe. Shapira P.Kuhlmann S., ed. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar; 2003:54-64.
11. Cozzens S. E.,Turpin T.Processes and mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring research outcomes from higher education: International comparisons.Research Evaluation. 2000;9:3-4.
12. Cruz-Castro L.,Sanz-Menéndez LThe changing governance of sciences. The advent of research evaluation systems. Whitley R.Glaser J., ed. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer:; 2008:205-223.
13. Darvas G.Evaluating science and scientists. An East-West Dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Frankel M. S.Cave J., ed. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press; 1997:18-27.
14. De Campos A. L.Report to RCUK Strategy Unit and Performance Evaluation Group. 2010, October:.
15. Féron E.,Crowley J.From research policy to the governance of research? A theoretical framework and some empirical conclusions.Innovation. 2003;16:369-393.
16. Frankel M. S.,Cave J.Evaluating science and scientists. An East-West dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Frankel M. S.Cave J., ed. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press; 1997:1-6.
17. Frederiksen L. F.,Hansson F.,Wenneberg S. B.The agora and the role of research evaluation.Evaluation. 2003;9:149-172.
18. Georghiou L.Research evaluation in European national science and technology systems.Research Evaluation. 1995;5:3-10.
19. Geuna A.,Martin B. R.University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison.Minerva. 2003;41:277-304.
20. Gibbons M.,Georghiou L.Evaluation of research: A selection of current practices. Paris, France: OECD; 1987:.
21. Jiménez-Contreras E.,de Moya Anegón F.,López-Cózar E. D.The evolution of research activity in Spain: The impact of the national commission for the evaluation of research activity (CNEAI).Research Policy. 2003;32:123-142.
22. Jordan A.The governance of sustainable development: Taking stock and looking forwards.Environment and Planning D. Government and Policy. 2008;26:17-33.
23. Kuhlmann S.Learning from science and technology policy evaluation. Experiences from the United States and Europe. Shapira P.Kuhlmann S., ed. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar; 2003:352-375.
24. Lascoumes P.Evaluation des Politiques Publiques. Kessler M.-C.Lascoumes P.Setbon M.Thoenig J.-C., ed. Paris, France: L'Harmattan; 1998:23-34.
25. Lebow R.,Spitzer R.Accountability. Freedom and responsibility without control. San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koehler; 2002:.
26. Marjanovic S.,Hanney S.,Wooding S.A historical reflection on research evaluation studies, their current themes and challenges. Santa Monica, CA: RAND; 2009:.
27. Martin B.Evaluating science and scientists. An East-West dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Frankel M. S.Cave J., ed. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press; 1997:28-45.
28. Martin B.The research excellence framework and the impact agenda: Are we creating a Frankenstein monster?.Research Evaluation. 2011;20:247-254.
29. Martin B.,Whitley R.Reconfiguring knowledge production. Changing authority relationships in the science and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Whitley R.Glässer J.Engwall L., ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2010:51-80.
30. Programa de Trabajo '09. Plan Nacional de I + D + I. Madrid: Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (FECYT; 2009:.
31. The republic of science: Its political and economic theory.Minerva. 1962;1:54-74.
32. Rich R. F.Translating evaluation into policy. London, England: Sage; 1979:.
33. Rip A.Learning form science and technology evaluation. Experiences from the United States and Europe. Shapira P.Kuhlmann S., ed. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar; 2003:32-53.
34. Sanz-Menéndez L.Research actors and the state: Research evaluation and evaluation of science and technology policies in Spain.Research Evaluation. 1995;5:79-88.
35. Scriven M.Perspectives of curriculum evaluation. Tyler R. W.Gagné R. M.Scriven M., ed. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally; 1967:39-83.
36. Scriven M.Evaluation Thesaurus. 1991). Evaluation Thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1991:.
37. Stufflebeam D. L.,Shinkfield A. J.Systematic evaluation. A self-instructional guide to theory and practice. Boston/Dordrecht/Lancaster: Kluwer-Nijhoff; 1985:.
38. Teirlinck POptimizing the research and innovation policy mix: The practice and challenges of impact assessment in Europe. Brussels:; 2011:.
39. ToulemondeJ. (2000). Evaluation culture(s) in Europe: Differences and convergence between national practices. Retrieved March 7, 2008, fromhttp://www.danskevalueringsselskab.dk/pdf/Toulemonde_paper.pdf.
40. von Tunzelmann N.,Mbula E. K.Changes in research assessment practices in other countries since 1999. Brighton, England: SPRU; 2003:.
41. Whitley R.,Glässer J.The changing governance of the sciences: the advent of research evaluation systems. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2007:.