IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v28y2001i4p303-311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking the provision of scientific equipment

Author

Listed:
  • Luke Georghiou
  • Kieron Flanagan
  • Peter Halfpenny

Abstract

Equipment is critical to the progress of research; therefore its provision is a significant science policy issue. There may be under-investment in equipment relative to other factors of scientific production such as staff. At a European level, inadequate infrastructure is a potential barrier to achievement of objectives, hence its recognition as a theme for the European Research Area. Equipment provision is inherently suited to benchmarking, though the scope of any exercise should be extended from instruments to include the whole policy and service package surrounding equipment. Three approaches to benchmarking are examined: opinion-based surveys; case-studies of matched research groups; and national surveys to a common format. Issues arising from comparison of experience in the UK and Ireland are discussed and conclusions are drawn regarding a possible European approach. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Luke Georghiou & Kieron Flanagan & Peter Halfpenny, 2001. "Benchmarking the provision of scientific equipment," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 303-311, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:4:p:303-311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154301781781435
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexandre Dias & Beatriz Selan, 2023. "How does university-industry collaboration relate to research resources and technical-scientific activities? An analysis at the laboratory level," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 392-415, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:4:p:303-311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.