IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v37y2013i4p693-717.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The UK Research Assessment Exercise and the narrowing of UK economics

Author

Listed:
  • Frederic S. Lee
  • Xuan Pham
  • Gyun Gu

Abstract

The aim of this article is to delineate an empirically grounded, structure-causal going concern recursive model of UK economics that, in the context of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) and local department decision making, explains the progressive elimination of heterodox economics, the progressive homogenisation of mainstream economics from 1992 to the present and the continued rise to dominance of a select group of departments, and indicates whether these events will continue under the Research Excellence Framework selectivity exercise in 2014. Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Frederic S. Lee & Xuan Pham & Gyun Gu, 2013. "The UK Research Assessment Exercise and the narrowing of UK economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 693-717.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:37:y:2013:i:4:p:693-717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bet031
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2011. "An updated ranking of academic journals in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1525-1538, November.
    2. Sergio Da Silva, 2009. "Going parochial in the assessment of the Brazilian economics research output," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(4), pages 2832-2852.
    3. Frederic S. Lee, 2011. "The Pluralism Debate in Heterodox Economics," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 540-551, December.
    4. Klaus Ritzberger, 2008. "A Ranking of Journals in Economics and Related Fields," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9, pages 402-430, November.
    5. Frederic S. Lee, 2007. "The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 309-325, March.
    6. George Emm Halkos & Nickolaos G. Tzeremes, 2011. "Measuring economic journals’ citation efficiency: a data envelopment analysis approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 979-1001, September.
    7. Freeman, Alan, 2008. "Submission from the Association for Heterodox Economics to the International Benchmarking Review on Research Assessment," MPRA Paper 52836, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Dec 2008.
    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. repec:eee:crpeac:v:52:y:2018:i:c:p:35-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Arne HEISE, 2016. "‘Why has economics turned out this way?’ A socio-economic note on the explanation of monism in economics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 81-101, November.
    3. repec:eee:crpeac:v:26:y:2015:i:c:p:37-46 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1218-y is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:psl:moneta:2017:32 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Whitley, Richard, 2016. "Varieties of scientific knowledge and their contributions to dealing with policy problems: A response to Richard Nelson’s “The sciences are different and the differences matter”," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1702-1707.
    7. Slavica Manic, PhD, 2014. "Has Economics Lost Its Own Identity?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(9), pages 1190-1200, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B50 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - General
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists

    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:oup:cambje:v:37:y:2013:i:4:p:693-717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.