IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v32y2023i1p19-31..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the arts in performance-based research funding systems: An international perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Kamila Lewandowska
  • Emanuel Kulczycki
  • Michael Ochsner

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the evaluation of the arts within performance-based research funding systems (PRFSs). Previous literature on PRFSs has overlooked the arts and focussed primarily on outputs in relation to the sciences and humanities. We develop a typology of how artistic outputs are evaluated within 10 countries’ PRFSs, operating in Australia, the Czech Republic, Italy, Lithuania, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, and the UK, and identify three different types of artistic evaluation systems. The study compares evaluation methods and provides a classification of quality criteria used by evaluation panels. We conclude with a discussion of the challenges specific to different types of systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Kamila Lewandowska & Emanuel Kulczycki & Michael Ochsner, 2023. "Evaluation of the arts in performance-based research funding systems: An international perspective," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 19-31.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:19-31.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvac017
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sven E Hug & Michael Ochsner, 2022. "Do peers share the same criteria for assessing grant applications?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 104-117.
    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.

      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:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:19-31.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

      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.