RePEc Click here to visit UConn Economics IDEAS

This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Top 5% Institutions and Economists in the Field of Efficiency & Productivity, as of November 2007

These rankings take only into account institutions registered in EDIRC and authors registered with the RePEc Author Service and the institutions they claimed to be affiliated with. For Efficiency & Productivity, these are 403 authors affiliated with 744 institutions.
For the worldwide rankings, see here: top 5% authors or top 5% economics institutions.
More rankings.
All authors classified in this field.
The rankings below are aggregate rankings from 31 different ranking methods, excluding worst and best method. See links above for details.
The data presented here is experimental. It is based on a limited sample of the research output in Economics and Finance. Only material catalogued in RePEc is considered. For any citation based criterion, only works that could be parsed by the CitEc project are considered. For any ranking of people, only those registered with the RePEc Author Service can be taken into account. And for rankings of institutions, only those listed in EDIRC and claimed as affiliation by the respective, registered authors can be measured. Thus, this list is by no means based on a complete sample. You can help making this more comprehensive by encouraging more publications to be listed (instructions) and more authors to register (form). For more details on the various rankings that are available as well for documentation, follow this link.

Top 5% institutions in the field of Efficiency & Productivity

Please note that rankings can depend on the number of registered authors in the respective institutions. Subentities of ranked institutions do not increment the rank count and have their rank listed in parentheses. Register at the RePEc Author Service.

The scores of institutions in each field are determined by a weighted sum of all authors affiliated with the respective institutions. The weights are determined, for each author, by the proportion of all working papers announced in NEP that have also been announced in NEP-EFF (Efficiency & Productivity).
RankScoreInstitution
11.04National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Cambridge
22.19Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), London
33.23Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn
46.32London School of Economics (LSE), University of London, London
56.79Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Bedrijfskunde, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
67.28Economics Department, Michigan State University, East Lansing
77.66Department of Economics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
88.6Department of Economics, Boston College, Chestnut Hill
(9)10Centre for Economic Performance (CEP), London School of Economics (LSE), University of London, London
911.04Department of Economics, School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University, New York City
(10)13.92Research Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Minneapolis
913.92Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Minneapolis
1116.29Department of Economics, University of Chicago, Chicago
1216.86United Nations University-Maastricht Economic Research Institute of Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT), Maastricht
1316.96Economics Department, Brown University, Providence
(14)17.06Department of Economics, College of Business, Arizona State University, Tempe
1317.06College of Business, Arizona State University, Tempe
1518.35Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques (OCDE), Paris
1618.46World Bank Group, Washington
1718.84Department of Economics, Northwestern University, Evanston
1820.34Department of Economics, University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles
1922.64Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York City
2022.67Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London
2122.95Department of Economics, University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley
2224.15Centro de Estudios Monetarios y Financieros (CEMFI), Madrid
2324.75Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California-Davis, Davis
2425.04Department of Economics, University of Toronto, Toronto
2525.39Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
2625.49Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge
2728.37Department of Economics, University of Maryland, College Park
(28)28.55Economics Department, Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques (OCDE), Paris
2829.41Department of Economics, State University of New York-Binghampton (SUNY), Binghamton
2930.22DIW Berlin (Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung), Berlin
3034.54International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington
3134.61Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, San Francisco
3235.19Department of Economics, University College London, University of London, London
3335.85Facultade de Ciencias Económicas e Empresariais, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela
3436.28Faculteit Economie en Bedrijfskunde, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen
3537.02Department of Economics, Oxford University, Oxford
3638.2School of Economics, University of Queensland, Brisbane
3742.22Department of Economics, Boston University, Boston

Top 5% authors in the field of Efficiency & Productivity

This ranking is based on registered authors only, and only those who are classified within this field. Authors can register at the RePEc Author Service.
RankScoreAuthor
1.2.42John Haltiwanger
2.2.66Robert J. Gordon
3.3.77Manuel Arellano
4.5.17Walter Erwin Diewert
5.5.37Peter Howitt
6.5.81Peter Schmidt
7.6.4Bronwyn Hughes Hall
8.6.59John Michael van Reenen
9.7Giancarlo Corsetti
10.8.14Susanto Basu
11.8.7Stephen M. Miller
12.9.08Edmund S. Phelps
13.12.73Rachel Griffith
14.14.6John Fernald
15.16.75Catherine J. Morrison Paul
16.17.16Jacques Mairesse
17.17.23Kevin Stiroh
18.18.65Joachim Wagner
19.19.06Jonathan E. Haskel
20.19.2Eva Aguayo

Credits:

We do our best, but we cannot exclude errors.