IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kue/dpaper/e-11-012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effects of Large-Scale Research Funding Programs:A Japanese Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Takanori Ida
  • Naomi Fukuzawa

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of large-scale research funding from the Japanese government on the research outcomes of university researchers. To evaluate the effects, we use the difference-in-differences estimator and measure research outcomes in terms of number of papers and citation counts per paper. Our analysis shows that the funding program led to an increase in the number of papers in some fields and an increase in the citation counts in the other fields. A comparison of our estimation results with assessment data obtained from peer reviews showed important differences. Since the characteristics of research vary according to the field, bibliometrics analysis should be used along with the peer review method for a more accurate analysis of research impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Takanori Ida & Naomi Fukuzawa, 2012. "Effects of Large-Scale Research Funding Programs:A Japanese Case Study," Discussion papers e-11-012, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    • Handle: RePEc:kue:dpaper:e-11-012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kyoto-u.ac.jp/projectcenter/Paper/e-11-012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2007. "Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers' interactions with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 694-707, June.
    2. Lee, Myoung-jae, 2005. "Micro-Econometrics for Policy, Program and Treatment Effects," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199267699.
    3. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    4. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Jaffee, Adam & Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rh8k6z2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    5. Norris, Michael & Oppenheim, Charles, 2007. "Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 161-169.
    6. Tobias Opthof & Loet Leydesdorff, 2011. "A comment to the paper by Waltman et al., Scientometrics, 87, 467–481, 2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 1011-1016, September.
    7. Lokman I. Meho & Kiduk Yang, 2007. "Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(13), pages 2105-2125, November.
    8. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees," NBER Working Papers 7631, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Dietz, James S. & Bozeman, Barry, 2005. "Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 349-367, April.
    10. Monica Gaughan & Branco Ponomariov, 2008. "Faculty publication productivity, collaboration, and grants velocity: using curricula vitae to compare center-affiliated and unaffiliated scientists," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 103-110, June.
    11. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," NBER Working Papers 7345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    13. Rinia, E. J. & van Leeuwen, Th. N. & van Vuren, H. G. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1998. "Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 95-107, May.
    14. Monica Gaughan, 2009. "Using the curriculum vitae for policy research: an evaluation of National Institutes of Health center and training support on career trajectories," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 117-124, June.
    15. Richard C. Anderson & Francis Narin & Paul McAllister, 1978. "Publication ratings versus peer ratings of universities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 29(2), pages 91-103, March.
    16. Monica Gaughan & Barry Bozeman, 2002. "Using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of NSF research grants with research center funding," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 17-26, April.
    17. Anthony F. J. Raan, 2006. "Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 491-502, June.
    18. Rinia, E. J. & van Leeuwen, Th. N. & van Vuren, H. G. & van Raan, A. F. J., 2001. "Influence of interdisciplinarity on peer-review and bibliometric evaluations in physics research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 357-361, March.
    19. Gaby Haddow & Paul Genoni, 2010. "Citation analysis and peer ranking of Australian social science journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 471-487, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Naomi Fukuzawa & Takanori Ida, 2016. "Science linkages between scientific articles and patents for leading scientists in the life and medical sciences field: the case of Japan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 629-644, February.
    2. Carter Bloch & Jesper W Schneider & Thomas Sinkjær, 2016. "Size, Accumulation and Performance for Research Grants: Examining the Role of Size for Centres of Excellence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Yuta Kikuchi, 2023. "Impact of university reform on research performance aggregated and disaggregated across research fields: a case study of the partial privatization of Japanese national universities," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 1-27, January.
    4. Peixin Duan, 2022. "How large of a grant size is appropriate? Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Gill, Chelsea & Mehrotra, Vishal & Moses, Olayinka & Bui, Binh, 2023. "The impact of the pitching research framework on AFAANZ grant applications," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Rongying Zhao & Xinlai Li & Zhisen Liang & Danyang Li, 2019. "Development strategy and collaboration preference in S&T of enterprises based on funded papers: a case study of Google," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 323-347, October.
    7. Moritaka Hosotsubo & Ryuei Nishii, 2016. "Relation between awarding of Grants-in-aid for scientific research and characteristics of applicants in Japanese universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1097-1116, November.
    8. Peyman Akhavan & Nader Ale Ebrahim & Mahdieh A. Fetrati & Amir Pezeshkan, 2016. "Major trends in knowledge management research: a bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1249-1264, June.
    9. Jennifer D. Artz & Mete Erdogan & Robert S. Green, 2016. "A national survey on small research grants and the scholarly productivity of emergency medicine physicians in Canada," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 329-338.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2008. "Patent Value and R&D Competition," Working Papers 51/2008, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    2. Jing-Yuan Chiou & Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2016. "Learning from successes and failures in pharmaceutical R&D," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 271-290, May.
    3. Naomi Fukuzawa, 2014. "An empirical analysis of the relationship between individual characteristics and research productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 785-809, June.
    4. Goto, Akira & Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2007. "Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1431-1442, November.
    5. Kilponen, Juha & Santavirta, Torsten, 2004. "Competition and Innovation - Microeconometric Evidence using Finnish Data," Research Reports 113, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Gianluca Baio & Laura Magazzini & Claudia Oglialoro & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2005. "Medical Devices: Competitiveness and Impact on Public Health Expenditure," Working Papers CERM 05-2005, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    7. Ufuk Akcigit, 2009. "Firm Size, Innovation Dynamics and Growth," 2009 Meeting Papers 1267, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    8. Emmanuel Duguet & Megan MacGarvie, 2005. "How well do patent citations measure flows of technology? Evidence from French innovation surveys," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 375-393.
    9. Su, Xuhong, 2014. "Academic scientists’ affiliation with university research centers: Selection dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 382-390.
    10. Palomeras, Neus, 2003. "Sleeping patents: any reason to wake up?," IESE Research Papers D/506, IESE Business School.
    11. Per Botolf Maurseth, 2005. "Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 351-374.
    12. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Maria Alessandra Rossi, 2009. "Patent disclosure and R&D competition in pharmaceuticals," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 467-486.
    14. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Patent Attributes on the Value of Discrete and Complex Innovations," Papers 2208.07222, arXiv.org.
    15. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    16. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 741-777, June.
    17. Cowan, Robin & Zinovyeva, Natalia, 2013. "University effects on regional innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 788-800.
    18. Gamal Atallah & Gabriel Rodríguez, 2006. "Indirect patent citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 437-465, June.
    19. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2007. "The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 318-339, August.
    20. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research assessment; Difference-in-differences; Government grants; University research; Bibliometrics; Peer review;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:kue:dpaper:e-11-012. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Graduate School of Economics Project Center (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fekyojp.html .

    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.