IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

France, the guarantor model and the institutionalisation of evaluation


  • Philippe Larédo
  • Philippe Mustar


The French evaluation scene highlights a particular configuration — the guarantor model. Historically, evaluation has played a major role in the recruitment and careers of researchers, and, since the 1960s, advisory committees have been responsible for evaluating the French R&D situation and policy. At the beginning of the 1980s two independent bodies — CNE and CNER — were given the responsibility of systematically and periodically evaluating all French research operators — research institutions, national programmes and agencies, universities, and ‘procedures’ (such as the research tax credit). The review of their first years of experience highlights three lessons: they were able to produce credible evaluations (a key issue for such exercises), they have had significant effects, both direct and indirect, on research operators, but the question of the uptake of their results at the policy level remains open. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Larédo & Philippe Mustar, 1995. "France, the guarantor model and the institutionalisation of evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 11-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:5:y:1995:i:1:p:11-21

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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 are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Laredo, Philippe, 1998. "The networks promoted by the framework programme and the questions they raise about its formulation and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 589-598, September.
    2. Georghiou, Luke & Roessner, David, 2000. "Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 657-678, April.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:5:y:1995:i:1:p:11-21. 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: .

    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 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.

    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.