IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecpoli/v34y2019i99p523-583..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic salaries and public evaluation of university research: Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Gianni De Fraja
  • Giovanni Facchini
  • John Gathergood

Abstract

SUMMARYWe study the effects of public evaluation of university research on the pay structures of academic departments. A simple equilibrium model of university pay determination shows how the pay performance relationship can be explained by the incentives inherent in the research evaluation process. We then analyse the pay performance relationship using data on the salary of all UK university full professors, matched to the performance of their departments from the 2014 UK government evaluation of research, the Research Excellence Framework (REF). A cross sectional empirical analysis shows that both average pay level and pay inequality in a department are positively related to performance. It also shows that the pay performance relationship is driven by a feature of the research evaluation that allows academics to transfer the affiliation of published research across universities. To assess the effect of the REF on pay structure, we take advantage of the time dimension of our data and of inherent uncertainty in the evaluation of the performance of academic departments generated by the rules of the exercise. Our results indicate that higher achieving departments benefit from increased subsequent hiring and higher professorial salaries with the salary benefits of REF performance concentrated among the highest paid professors.

Suggested Citation

  • Gianni De Fraja & Giovanni Facchini & John Gathergood, 2019. "Academic salaries and public evaluation of university research: Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(99), pages 523-583.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecpoli:v:34:y:2019:i:99:p:523-583.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/epolic/eiz009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniele Checchi & Alberto Ciolfi & Gianni De Fraja & Irene Mazzotta & Stefano Verzillo, 2021. "Have you Read This? An Empirical Comparison of the British REF Peer Review and the Italian VQR Bibliometric Algorithm," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(352), pages 1107-1129, October.
    2. Smith, Sarah & Sevilla, Almudena, 2020. "Women in economics: A UK Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 15034, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Markus Eberhardt & Giovanni Facchini & Valeria Rueda, 2023. "Gender Differences in Reference Letters: Evidence from the Economics Job Market," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(655), pages 2676-2708.
    4. Gerhard Reichmann & Christian Schlögl, 2022. "On the possibilities of presenting the research performance of an institute over a long period of time: the case of the Institute of Information Science at the University of Graz in Austria," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3193-3223, June.
    5. Heinz Ahn & Marcel Clermont & Julia Langner, 2022. "The impact of selected input and output factors on measuring research efficiency of university research fields: insights from a purpose-, field-, and method-specific perspective," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(8), pages 1303-1335, October.
    6. Erich Battistin & Marco Ovidi, 2022. "Rising Stars: Expert Reviews and Reputational Yardsticks in the Research Excellence Framework," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(356), pages 830-848, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    D47; H42; I28; L30;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • L30 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - General

    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:ecpoli:v:34:y:2019:i:99:p:523-583.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cebruuk.html .

    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.