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 Economics of Ageing, as of March 2009

This page shows one of the many rankings computed with RePEc data. They are based on data about authors who have registered with the RePEc Author Service, institutions listed on EDIRC, bibliographic data collected by RePEc, citation analysis performed by CitEc and popularity data compiled by LogEc. To find more rankings, historical data and detailed methodology, click here. Or see the ranking FAQ. For Economics of Ageing, these are 148 authors affiliated with 409 institutions.
All authors classified in this field.

Top 5% institutions in the field of Economics of Ageing

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-AGE (Economics of Ageing).
RankScoreInstitution
11RAND, Santa Monica
22.68Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge
33.66Economics Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge
43.74Geary Institute, University College Dublin, Dublin
56.23Department of Economics, University of Washington, Seattle
66.66Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London
78.9Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques (OCDE), Paris
(8)9.47Labor and Population Program, RAND, Santa Monica
89.58Olin School of Business, Washington University, St. Louis
99.94National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Cambridge
1013.26Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge
(11)13.47Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs (ELS), Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques (OCDE), Paris
1114.4Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton
(11)14.4Research Program in Development Studies, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton
1214.63Federal Reserve Board (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System), Washington
1315.73Department of Economics, Ohio State University, Columbus
1416.82Center for Retirement Research (CRR), Boston College, Chestnut Hill
1519.56Department of Economics, University College London (UCL), University of London, London
1619.61Urban Institute, Washington
1719.62Department of Economics, New York University, New York City
1820.04Economics Department, Dartmouth College, Hanover
(19)21.44ESRC Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy (CPP), Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London
1922.28International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington
2023.11Asian Development Bank Institute, Asian Development Bank, Tokyo

Top 5% authors in the field of Economics of Ageing

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
1.1.66David Bloom
2.2.19Michael D. Hurd
3.3.07David Canning
4.3.33Neil Bruce
5.6.34Timothy Aaron Waidmann
6.7.6Jayant Menon
7.8.63Agar Brugiavini

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.

Credits:

We do our best, but we cannot exclude errors.