IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v14y2026i2p22-d1910889.html

Quantitative Assessment of Scholarly Output and ROI in ARC-Funded Australian Research

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Blackmore

    (School of Computer and Information Sciences, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

  • Xin Gu

    (School of Information Technology, King’s Own Institute, Sydney 2000, Australia
    School of Information Technology, Kent Institute of Higher Education, Sydney 2000, Australia)

  • Shaleeza Sohail

    (School of Computer and Information Sciences, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

Abstract

Government funding programs administered by the Australian Research Council (ARC) aim to advance national research priorities while generating scholarly and socio-economic impact. This study employs a descriptive bibliometric benchmarking approach to examine the relationship between funding levels and scholarly output for publications explicitly acknowledging ARC support. Using project-level funding data linked with journal articles published between 2009 and 2016, we analyze 10,565 ARC-funded projects receiving a total of AUD 4.6 billion and producing 54,639 journal publications. On average, each project received approximately AUD 437,720 and generated five publications, corresponding to a cost of about AUD 84,700 per article. We compare research productivity, citation impact, and return on investment across ARC Discovery and Linkage programs, as well as between STEM and HASS disciplines. The results reveal no strong correlation between funding amount and either publication volume or citation impact across ARC programs. STEM projects generally exhibit higher returns on investment and citation impact; however, a subset of HASS projects achieves exceptionally high efficiency relative to funding received. Notably, projects funded below AUD 100,000 demonstrate the highest return on investment in terms of both publication productivity and normalized citation impact. These findings suggest that smaller grants can yield disproportionately high scholarly returns, offering important implications for research funding allocation, efficiency evaluation, and performance assessment in public research systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Blackmore & Xin Gu & Shaleeza Sohail, 2026. "Quantitative Assessment of Scholarly Output and ROI in ARC-Funded Australian Research," Publications, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-28, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:14:y:2026:i:2:p:22-:d:1910889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/14/2/22/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/14/2/22/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jpubli:v:14:y:2026:i:2:p:22-:d:1910889. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.