Higher Education & Research Citation Impact in BRICK countries moves towords world average, impacting innovation and wealth creating according new sciencewatch report

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Korea—the BRICK nations—have repeatedly been noted for their growing influence in the global economy and research landscape, and are often referred to as “emerging.” What would move them from emerging to established?

To capture a better understanding of their progress, we reviewed data on R&D spending, human capital, research publications, and patent filings—key indicators of the sustained, diversified research innovation base enjoyed by many of the G7 knowledge economies. The data not only confirm and quantify the rising status of countries beyond the G7 axis as a group, but also spotlight the individual complexities that offer a richer tapestry behind the “emerging” label.

For the analysis, this report draws on data from Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge, Derwent World Patent Index, and third-party data, including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología (RICYT), and the World Bank.

 

The authors: “Investment in higher education and research builds up a country’s knowledge capacity, its ability to use discovery and innovation to create economic wealth, and its potential to realize benefits in health, culture and the quality of life. The increases in output that reflect the growing level of investment will not immediately be translated into world-class research because, as we noted, it will take time to train a new generation of researchers. It will also take time to draw the quality of the new research to the attention of the rest of the world.

That said, we can already begin to see strong signals of improving research impact among the five BRICK countries (as seen in Figure). In order to get a handle on research ‘excellence,’ we have used the frequency with which publications are cited by later works as an index of their impact on the rest of the research community. Citation rates vary by field and citation counts grow by year, so the actual citation count is adjusted (or normalized) for both discipline and year of publication as a ratio on the appropriate world average in the same Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge data, to give a Relative Citation
Impact index (where world average = 1.00).”

 

 

source:

Building BRICKSFebruary 2013Global Research Reportby Jonathan Adams, David Pendlebury, Bob StembridgeScience Watch, Thomson Reuters

 

 

 

See on sciencewatch.com

Advertisements

Academic Institutions in Search of Quality: Local Orders and Global Standards

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

Quality judgements in terms of academic standards of excellence required by external stakeholders such as labour markets and steering hierarchies obviously exert strong pressure on universities. Do they generate an ‘iron cage’ effect, imposing a passive and uniform conformity on global standards? The paper examines the organization of higher education and research set-ups with a strong lens. What does academic quality actually mean when observed in the field? How do universities and their subunits – professional schools, colleges, etc. – actually achieve what they call quality? A methodological and analytical framework is tested. Three sociological concepts – diversity, recognition and local order – make it possible to build four ideal types applicable to comparative inquiry. Such a typology identifies the interdependencies existing between how they position themselves with respect to quality dimensions and internal organizational measures. The paper contributes to a broader organizational study agenda: how do local orders face and deal with market and hierarchy dynamics in a global world of apparently increasing standardization under pressure from soft power. It questions the effect of the ‘iron cage’ hypothesis. It lists a series of changing patterns or dynamics between types of universities in terms of quality sensitivity, fabrication and content. Diversity and standardization in fact coexist.

 

The authors:

“universities, their colleges, professional schools, research centres and educational departments all have to consider, willingly or not, a logic of quality in which publications matter as much if not more than education, for generating resources – money, buildings, equipment, academics, students, etc. Ex post performance, and not ex ante reputation, pushes them to play the role of proactive operators. Reputation-based rents and community service do not suffice.”

 

Source:

Academic Institutions in Search of Quality: Local Orders and Global Standards Catherine ParadeiseUniversité Paris Est/Institut Francilien Recherche, Innovation, Sociétés, FranceJean-Claude ThoenigCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique and Université Paris-Dauphine, France
doi: 10.1177/0170840612473550Organization Studies February 2013vol. 34 no. 2 189-218
See on oss.sagepub.com

Dynamics of the Contemporary University; Growth, Accretion, and Conflict

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

This book is an expanded version of the Clark Kerr Lectures of 2012, delivered by Neil Smelser at the University of California at Berkeley in January and February of that year. The initial exposition is of a theory of change—labeledstructural accretion—that has characterized the history of American higher education, mainly (but not exclusively) of universities. The essence of the theory is that institutions of higher education progressively add functions, structures, and constituencies as they grow, but seldom shed them, yielding increasingly complex structures. The first two lectures trace the multiple ramifications of this principle into other arenas, including the essence of complexity in the academic setting, the solidification of academic disciplines and departments, changes in faculty roles and the academic community, the growth of political constituencies, academic administration and governance, and academic stratification by prestige. In closing, Smelser analyzes a number of contemporary trends and problems that are superimposed on the already-complex structures of higher education, such as the diminishing public support without alterations of governance and accountability, the increasing pattern of commercialization in higher education, the growth of distance-learning and for-profit institutions, and the spectacular growth of temporary and part-time faculty.

Contents:

Chapter I: Dynamics of American Universities

Chapter 2: The Dynamics Ramify: Academic Politics, Conflict, and Inequality
Instabilities Imposed on Inertial Stability

Chapter 3: Contemporary Trends: Diagnoses and Conditional Predictions
An Unprecedented Perfect Storm

Source:

Dynamics of the Contemporary UniversityGrowth, Accretion, and ConflictNeil J. Smelser (Author)The Clark Kerr Lectures On the Role of Higher Education in SocietyAn Atkinson Book in Higher Education Hardcover, 152 pagesISBN: 9780520275812
Neil J. Smelser is a University Professor Emeritus of Sociology and former director of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford.

See on www.ucpress.edu

MERIL – the most excellent research infrastructures (RIs) in Europe across all scientific domains

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

The MERIL portal gives access to an inventory of the most excellent research infrastructures (RIs) of ‘more-than-national’ relevance in Europe across all scientific domains, including the humanities and social sciences. It aims to be a user-friendly resource for information commonly needed by researchers seeking access to an infrastructure and by policy-makers analysing the current status of research infrastructures in Europe. The database will be continuously updated with RIs that meet the criteria for inclusion (see below).

RIs included in the database have been evaluated through a national or European process on the basis of commonly agreed criteria and recognised as being of the highest standards and relevance to research in Europe. Inclusion in the database is thus a label of quality.

Each research infrastructure in the database is described in a standard format, with a limited amount of core information and a web link to each individual research infrastructure.

Why is MERIL important?

MERIL is intended to:

Improve scientists’ access to resources, services and facilities offered by modern research infrastructures;Promote individual research infrastructures by raising their profile and fostering a greater sense of partnership across Europe;Allow policy-makers to assess the state of research infrastructures throughout Europe to pinpoint gaps or duplications and make decisions about where best to direct funding;Stimulate discussion among policy-makers and research funders on RI funding and joint investment, where appropriate;Support the exchange of expertise and best practice among RI coordinators with a view to optimising the operation and exploitation of research infrastructures;Contribute with this state-of-the-art analysis to the planning for future needs in cooperation with the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI).
See on portal.meril.eu

From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society – enhancing entrepreneurship capital and facilitating behavior to prosper in an entrepreneurial society

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

This article examines how and why the role of the university in society has evolved over time. The paper argues that the forces shaping economic growth and performance have also influenced the corresponding role for the university. As the economy has evolved from being driven by physical capital to knowledge, and then again to being driven by entrepreneurship, the role of the university has also evolved over time. While the entrepreneurial university was a response to generate technology transfer and knowledge-based startups, the role of the university in the entrepreneurial society has broadened to focus on enhancing entrepreneurship capital and facilitating behavior to prosper in an entrepreneurial society.

 

The author:

 

“While the entrepreneurial university has a mandate to facilitate the commercialization of university research and generate startups and new ventures, the role of the university in the entrepreneurial society is considerably broader and more fundamental—to provide thinking, leadership and activity to enhance entrepreneurship capital. The goal of the university in the Entrepreneurial Society is not just to promote technology transfer and

increase the number of startups but to ensure that people thrive in the emerging entrepreneurial society.”

 

Source:

The Journal of Technology TransferDecember 2012From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial societyDavid B. Audretsch

DOI10.1007/s10961-012-9288-1

See on link.springer.com

Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

There is abundant evidence that research collaboration has become the norm in every field of scientific and technical research. We provide a critical overview of the literature on research collaboration, focusing particularly on individual-level collaborations among university researchers, but we also give attention to university researchers’ collaborations with researchers in other sectors, including industry. We consider collaborations aimed chiefly at expanding the base of knowledge (knowledge-focused collaborations) as well as ones focused on production of economic value and wealth (property-focused collaborations), the latter including most academic entrepreneurship research collaborations. To help organize our review we develop a framework for analysis, one that considers attributes of collaborators, collaborative process and organization characteristics as the affect collaboration choices and outcomes. In addition, we develop and use a “Propositional Table for Research Collaboration Literature,” presented as an “Appendix” to this study. We conclude with some suggestions for possible improvement in research on collaboration including: (1) more attention to multiple levels of analysis and the interactions among them; (2) more careful measurement of impacts as opposed to outputs; (3) more studies on ‘malpractice’ in collaboration, including exploitation; (4) increased attention to collaborators’ motives and the social psychology of collaborative teams.

 

The authors:

“..there is now greater need to understand the complexity of collaboration calculus. Conflicts among centers, industries and traditional academic departments were not so important decades ago. Abundant resources, no longer the norm, also had a tendency to reduce complexity. But with declining grant money and fewer academic positions in most fields, competitive dynamics intercede to a degree not common in the past. It seems to us that the research has had a very difficult time keeping pace with the changes in the researchers’ environment.”

 

Source:

The Journal of Technology TransferFebruary 2013, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 1-67Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-artBarry Bozeman, Daniel Fay, Catherine P. Slade

DOI10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8

See on link.springer.com

RSS Business School News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Locations of Site Visitors

Altmetric Related stuf

if(typeof(AltmetricWidget) !== 'undefined'){ window.AltmetricWidget489 = new AltmetricWidget("AltmetricWidget489"); }}

%d bloggers like this: