An Uneven Playing Field: Rankings and Ratings for Economics in Era 2010

14 Pages Posted: 13 Jan 2014

See all articles by Harry Bloch

Harry Bloch

Curtin University of Technology - Curtin Business School - School of Economics and Finance

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: April 1, 2012

Abstract

In the evaluation of research quality conducted under ERA 2010 the sub-disciplines of econometrics and theory were rated more highly than the sub-disciplines of applied economics and other economics. The rating in each sub-discipline was benchmarked against a world standard, so the results suggest that Australian economists produce relatively better econometric or theory research than applied or other economics research. However, closer examination of the processes on which the ratings were based suggests built-in biases that favour theory and econometric research over applied and other economics research, leaving the relative quality of research in the various sub-disciplines open to question.

Suggested Citation

Bloch, Harry, An Uneven Playing Field: Rankings and Ratings for Economics in Era 2010 (April 1, 2012). CRAE Research Paper No. 04042012. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2378171 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2378171

Harry Bloch (Contact Author)

Curtin University of Technology - Curtin Business School - School of Economics and Finance ( email )

Curtin University
GPO Box U 1987
Perth, 6845
Australia
+61 8 9266 2035 (Phone)
+61 8 9266 3026 (Fax)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
6
Abstract Views
207
PlumX Metrics