IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9583-d622029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research and Development Talents Training in China Universities—Based on the Consideration of Education Management Cost Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Long-Hao Yang

    (School of Economics and Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, China)

  • Biyu Liu

    (School of Economics and Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, China)

  • Jun Liu

    (School of Computing, Ulster University, Jordanstown, Co. Antrim BT37 0QB, UK)

Abstract

Research and development (R&D) talents training are asymmetric in China universities and can be of great significance for economic and social sustainable development. For the purpose of making an in-depth analysis in the education management costs for R&D talents training, the belief rule-based (BRB) expert system with data increment and parameter learning is developed to achieve education management cost prediction for the first time. In empirical analysis, based on the BRB expert system, the past investments and future planning of education management costs are analyzed using real education management data from 2001 to 2019 in 31 Chinese provinces. Results show that: (1) the existing education management cost investments have a significant regional difference; (2) the BRB expert system has excellent accuracy over some existing cost-prediction models; and (3) without changing the current education management policy and education cost input scheme, the regional differences in China’s education management cost input always exist. In addition to the results, the present study is helpful for providing model supports and policy references for decision makers in making well-grounded plans of R&D talents training at universities

Suggested Citation

  • Long-Hao Yang & Biyu Liu & Jun Liu, 2021. "Research and Development Talents Training in China Universities—Based on the Consideration of Education Management Cost Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9583-:d:622029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9583/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9583/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kujal Praveen & Ruiz Juan M., 2007. "Cost Effectiveness of R&D and Strategic Trade Policy," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-35, April.
    2. Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2006. "Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1885-1913, November.
    3. Paula Fomby & Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, 2019. "Family Systems and Parents’ Financial Support for Education in Early Adulthood," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 56(5), pages 1875-1897, October.
    4. Saura, José Ramón & Palacios-Marqués, Daniel & Iturricha-Fernández, Agustín, 2021. "Ethical design in social media: Assessing the main performance measurements of user online behavior modification," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 271-281.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gao, Bin & Ni, Ming-Fang, 2009. "A note on article "The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees"," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(2), pages 809-812, September.
    2. Sami Kabir & Mohammad Shahadat Hossain & Karl Andersson, 2024. "An Advanced Explainable Belief Rule-Based Framework to Predict the Energy Consumption of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-18, April.
    3. J-B Yang & D-L Xu & X Xie & A K Maddulapalli, 2011. "Multicriteria evidential reasoning decision modelling and analysis—prioritizing voices of customer," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1638-1654, September.
    4. Miranda, Sandra & Trigo, Inês & Rodrigues, Ricardo & Duarte, Margarida, 2023. "Addiction to social networking sites: Motivations, flow, and sense of belonging at the root of addiction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. C. Y. Ng & K. B. Chuah, 2017. "Environmental Impact Evaluations on Product Design Alternatives Using the Combined Evidential Reasoning with Fuzzy Set," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 1-25, September.
    6. Anni Arumsari Fitriany & Piotr J. Flatau & Khoirunurrofik Khoirunurrofik & Nelly Florida Riama, 2021. "Assessment on the Use of Meteorological and Social Media Information for Forest Fire Detection and Prediction in Riau, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-13, October.
    7. Yang, Guo-liang & Yang, Jian-bo & Liu, Wen-bin & Li, Xiao-xuan, 2013. "Cross-efficiency aggregation in DEA models using the evidential-reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 393-404.
    8. Zhou, Zhi-Jie & Hu, Chang-Hua & Xu, Dong-Ling & Chen, Mao-Yin & Zhou, Dong-Hua, 2010. "A model for real-time failure prognosis based on hidden Markov model and belief rule base," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 269-283, November.
    9. Xiaojiao Qiao & Dan Shi, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Emergency Based on Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-10, November.
    10. Jun Liu & Jian-Bo Yang & Da Ruan & Luis Martinez & Jin Wang, 2008. "Self-tuning of fuzzy belief rule bases for engineering system safety analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 143-168, October.
    11. Praveen Kujal & Juan M. Ruiz, 2009. "International Trade Policy towards Monopoly and Oligopoly," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 461-475, August.
    12. Saura, Jose Ramon & Palacios-Marqués, Daniel & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo, 2023. "Exploring the boundaries of open innovation: Evidence from social media mining," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    13. Clara Maathuis & Iddo Kerkhof, 2023. "The first two months in the war in Ukraine through topic modeling and sentiment analysis," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 56-74, February.
    14. Jo, Seung-gyu & den Butter, Frank A. G., 2009. "Pros and Cons of Backing Winners in Innovation Policy," MPRA Paper 17658, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Hamed Nozari & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Javid Ghahremani-Nahr, 2021. "The Ideas of Sustainable and Green Marketing Based on the Internet of Everything—The Case of the Dairy Industry," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Kong, Guilan & Xu, Dong-Ling & Body, Richard & Yang, Jian-Bo & Mackway-Jones, Kevin & Carley, Simon, 2012. "A belief rule-based decision support system for clinical risk assessment of cardiac chest pain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 564-573.
    17. Lütjens, Henk & Eisenbeiss, Maik & Fiedler, Maximilian & Bijmolt, Tammo, 2022. "Determinants of consumers’ attitudes towards digital advertising – A meta-analytic comparison across time and touchpoints," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 445-466.
    18. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2010. "The group consensus based evidential reasoning approach for multiple attributive group decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(3), pages 601-608, November.
    19. Everton Luiz de Aguiar & André Eugenio Lazzaretti & Bruna Machado Mulinari & Daniel Rodrigues Pipa, 2021. "Scattering Transform for Classification in Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    20. Phillips, Jason & Whiting, Kai, 2016. "A geocybernetic analysis of the principles of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI)," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 248-265.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9583-:d:622029. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (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.