Formulaic Follies Revisited: Or, Why Geography Researchers Get Almost Twice as Much Money as do Town Planners in English Universities

Ron Johnston

Environment and Planning A, 1993, vol. 25, issue 10, 1527-1534

Abstract: The funding for research activities in English universities from 1993/94 on is based on a formula allocation which has many apparent anomalies: variations in the standardised sums available per discipline bear little relationship to interdisciplinary differences in research costs. Using data released by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, I seek to understand how those differences have come about. Only 43% of the variation could be accounted for statistically by a simple classification of disciplines into clinical, science, and social science/humanities. A further 17% was associated with four other factors reflecting institutional differences in aspects of the disciplines which could have been taken into account when the allocation formula was determined—but which were not. The conclusion is that a much fairer system can and must replace that currently operated.

Date: 1993
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a251527 (text/html)

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:sae:envira:v:25:y:1993:i:10:p:1527-1534

DOI: 10.1068/a251527

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning A
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().