Sense and nonsense of S&T productivity indicators

Rémi Barré

Science and Public Policy, 2001, vol. 28, issue 4, 259-266

Abstract: This article presents a process for benchmarking scientific productivity fit for public policy purposes, in which quantitative indicators have the major role of initiating and focusing the discussions. It shows that the calculation of a research productivity indicator defined as the ratio of the output (publications) of basic research to its spending does not provide in itself any sensible comparison among countries. It suggests that quantitative indicators are useful as entry points into discussions, considering that their raison d'être is to be criticised in terms of their (limited) relevance and (limited) comparability. In this interpretation, benchmarking necessarily involves direct interaction among people in an organised process. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Date: 2001
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154301781781381 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
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: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:4:p:259-266

Access Statistics for this article

Science and Public Policy is currently edited by Nicoletta Corrocher, Jeong-Dong Lee, Mireille Matt and Nicholas Vonortas

More articles in Science and Public Policy from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().