Ben R. Martin

What is Research Collaboration

Although there have been many previous studies of research collaboration, comparatively little attention has been given to the concept of ‘collaboration’ or to the adequacy of attempting to measure it through co-authorship. In this paper, we distinguish between collaboration at different levels and show that inter-institutional and international collaboration need not necessarily involve inter-individual collaboration. We also show that co-authorship is no more than a partial indicator of collaboration. Lastly, we argue for a more symmetrical approach in comparing the costs of collaboration with the undoubted benefits when considering policies towards research collaboration.

The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review

This article critically reviews the literature on the economic benefits of publicly funded basic research. In that literature, three main methodological approaches have been adopted — econometric studies, surveys and case studies. Econometric studies are subject to certain methodological limitations but they suggest that the economic benefits are very substantial. These studies have also highlighted the importance of spillovers and the existence of localisation effects in research. From the literature based on surveys and on case studies, it is clear that the benefits from public investment in basic research can take a variety of forms. We classify these into six main categories, reviewing the evidence on the nature and extent of each type. The relative importance of these different forms of benefit apparently varies with scientific field, technology and industrial sector. Consequently, no simple model of the economic benefits from basic research is possible. We reconsider the rationale for government funding of basic research, arguing that the traditional ‘market failure’ justification needs to be extended to take account of these different forms of benefit from basic research. The article concludes by identifying some of the policy implications that follow from this review.

Assessing basic research : Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy

As the costs of certain types of scientific research have escalated, and as growth rates in overall national science budgets have declined, so the need for an explicit science policy has grown more urgent. In order to establish priorities between research groups competing for scarce funds, one of the most important pieces of information needed by science policymakers is an assessment of those groups’ recent scientific performance. This paper suggests a method for evaluating that performance. After reviewing the literature on scientific assessment, we argue that, while there are no simple measures of the contributions to scientific knowledge made by scientists, there are a number of ‘partial indicators’ that is, variables determined partly by the magnitude of the particular contributions, and partly by ‘other factors’. If the partial indicators are to yield reliable results, then the influence of these ‘other factors’ must be minimised. This is the aim of the method of ‘converging partial indicators’ proposed in this paper. We argue that the method overcomes many of the problems encountered in previous work on scientific assessment by incorporating the following elements: (1) the indicators are applied to research groups rather than individual scientists; (2) the indicators based on citations are seen as reflecting the impact, rather than the quality or importance, of the research work; (3) a range of indicators are employed, each of which focuses on different aspects of a group’s performance; (4) the indicators are applied to matched groups, comparing ‘like’ with ‘like’ as far as

Foresight in science and technology

Emerging generic technologies seem set to make a revolutionary impact on the economy and society. However, success in developing such technologies depends upon advances in science. Confronted with increasing global economic competition, policy-makers and scientists are grappling with the problem of how to select the most promising research areas and emerging technologies on which to target resources and, hence, derive the greatest benefits. This paper analyzes the experiences of Japan, the US, the Netherlands, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and the UK in using foresight to help in selecting and exploiting research that is likely to yield longer-term economic and social benefits. It puts forward a model of the foresight process for identifying research areas and technologies of strategic importance, and also analyzes why some foresight exercises have proved more successful than others. It concludes by drawing an analogy between models of innovation and foresight.

THE USE OF MULTIPLE INDICATORS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF BASIC RESEARCH

This paper argues that evaluations of basic research are best carried out using a range of indicators. After setting out the reasons why assessments of government-funded basic research are increasingly needed, we examine the multi-dimensional nature of basic research. This is followed by a conceptual analysis of what the different indicators of basic research actually measure. Having discussed the limitations of various indicators, we describe the method of converging partial indicators used in several SPRU evaluations. Yet although most of those who now use science indicators would agree that a combination of indicators is desirable, analysis of a sample ofScientometrics articles suggests that in practice many continue to use just one or two indicators. The paper also reports the results of a survey of academic researchers. They, too, are strongly in favour of research evaluations being based on multiple indicators combined with peer review. The paper ends with a discussion as to why multiple indicators are not used more frequently.

Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system: experiences in Britain, Australia and New Zealand

Abstract Since 1990, technology foresight has spread rapidly. We begin by analyzing the reasons for this before examining the specific political background to technology foresight in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. The article analyzes and compares the approaches to foresight in these countries, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. We then propose a new rationale for technology foresight, which centers on its role in “wiring up” and thereby strengthening the national innovation system, before arriving at a number of conclusions.

The Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact agenda’: are we creating a Frankenstein monster?

In pursuit of public accountability, the mechanisms for assessing research performance have become more complicated and burdensome. In the United Kingdom, the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) evolved from an initially simple framework to something much more complex and onerous. As the RAE now gives way to the Research Excellence Framework (REF), ‘impact assessment’ is being added to the process. Impact comes in numerous forms, however, so its assessment is far from straightforward. While the Higher Education Funding Council for England is initially proposing a relatively simple methodology, the history of the RAE suggests that this approach will over time become ever more sophisticated. Yet if the ‘costs’ of an elaborate system for assessing ‘research excellence’ and its impact then exceed the benefits, the time may have come to re-examine whether a dual-support system still represents the optimum way of funding university research. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

A Morphology of Japanese and European Corporate Research Networks

Institutions performing research often collaborate with each other, and firms are no exception. In recent years

Bibliometric profiles for British academic institutions: An experiment to develop research output indicators

In this paper, we report the results of an exploratory study commissioned by the Advisory Board for the Research Councils to produce bibliometric research profiles for academic and related institutions within the UK. The approach adopted is based on the methodology developed by CHI Research whereby publications from a given institution are weighted according to the influence of the journal in which they appear. Although certain technical limitations were encountered with the approach, the study nonetheless yielded potentially useful information on the comparative research output of British universities and polytechnics.

Basic Research in the East and West: A Comparison of the Scientific Performance of High-Energy Physics Accelerators

This paper presents the results of a study comparing the past scientific performance of high-energy physics accelerators in the Eastern bloc with that of their main Western counterparts. Output-evaluation indicators are used. After carefully examining the extent to which the output indicators used may be biased against science in the Eastern bloc, various conclusions are drawn about the relative contributions to science made by these accelerators. Where significant differences in performance are apparent, an attempt is made to identify the main factors responsible.