Research Governance in Academia: Are there Alternatives to Academic Rankings?

Margit Osterloh and Bruno S. Frey ()

CREMA Working Paper Series from Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA)

Abstract: Peer reviews and rankings today are the backbone of research governance, but recently came under scrutiny. They take explicitly or implicitly agency theory as a theoretical basis. The emerging psychological economics opens a new perspective. As scholarly research is a mainly curiosity driven endeavor, we include intrinsic motivation and supportive feedback by the peers as important determinants of scholarly behavior. We discuss whether a stronger emphasis on selection and socialization offers an alternative to the present regime of academic rankings.

Keywords: peer reviews; rankings; research governance; agency theory; psychological economics; new public management; economics of science; control theory (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe, nep-edu, nep-evo, nep-ipr and nep-sog
Date: 2009-07
View citations in EconPapers

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.crema-research.ch/papers/2009-17.pdf Full Text (application/pdf)
http://www.crema-research.ch/abstracts/2009-17.htm Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
Working Paper: Research governance in academia: are there alternatives to academic rankings? (2009)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cra:wpaper:2009-17

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in CREMA Working Paper Series from Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA)
Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Anna-Lea Werlen ().