IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v29y2002i5p314-330.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do US Congressional earmarks increase research output at universities?

Author

Listed:
  • A Abigail Payne

Abstract

For 20 years US universities have been able to bypass peer-reviewed research competition for federal funding and seek a direct appropriation of funding from Congress. Proponents of this earmarking claim it helps a university to build the infrastructure needed to be able to compete for peer-reviewed funding. Opponents claim this funding is used poorly and is less productive than peer-reviewed funding. Using two panel data sets that span 1980 to 1998, incorporating university and year fixed effects, and using an instrumental variables estimation, this paper shows that while the number of articles published increases, the number of citations per article decreases. In general, the study suggests that earmarked funding may increase the quantity of publications but may decrease their quality. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • A Abigail Payne, 2002. "Do US Congressional earmarks increase research output at universities?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(5), pages 314-330, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:29:y:2002:i:5:p:314-330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154302781780822
    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. Payne A. Abigail & Siow Aloysius, 2003. "Does Federal Research Funding Increase University Research Output?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, May.
    2. John M. de Figueiredo & Brian S. Silverman, 2002. "Academic Earmarks and the Returns to Lobbying," NBER Working Papers 9064, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    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. de Figueiredo, John & Silverman, Brian, 2004. "How Does the Government (Want to) Fund Science? Politics, Lobbying and Academic Earmarks," Working papers 4484-04, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Bozeman, Barry & Jung, Jiwon, 2017. "Bureaucratization in Academic Research Policy: What Causes It?," Annals of Science and Technology Policy, now publishers, vol. 1(2), pages 133-214, May.
    3. Daghbashyan, Zara, 2009. "Do university units differ in the efficiency of resource utilization?," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 176, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, revised 17 Dec 2012.
    4. Bo Zhao, 2018. "State disinvestment in higher education: the impact on public research universities' patent applications," Working Papers 19-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    5. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. Gerald A. Carlino & Robert M. Hunt, 2009. "What explains the quantity and quality of local inventive activity?," Working Papers 09-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    7. Henry Ergas, 2010. "New policies create a new politics: issues of institutional design in climate change policy," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(2), pages 143-164, April.
    8. Rachel Heyard & Hanna Hottenrott, 2020. "The Impact of Research Funding on Knowledge Creation and Dissemination: A study of SNSF Research Grants," Papers 2011.11274, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2021.
    9. Brach, Ann & Wachs, Martin, 2005. "Earmarking in the US Department of Transportation Research Programs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 501-521, July.
    10. Rachel Heyard & Hanna Hottenrott, 2021. "The value of research funding for knowledge creation and dissemination: A study of SNSF Research Grants," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Ergas, Henry, 2010. "New policies create a new politics: issues of institutional design in climate change policy," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(2), pages 1-22.

    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. Olof Ejermo & John Källström, 2016. "What is the causal effect of R&D on patenting activity in a “professor’s privilege” country? Evidence from Sweden," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 677-694, October.
    2. Cooray, Arusha, 2011. "The role of the government in financial sector development," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 928-938, May.
    3. Campbell, Randall C. & Nagel, Gregory L., 2016. "Private information and limitations of Heckman's estimator in banking and corporate finance research," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 186-195.
    4. Herrera, Santiago, 2000. "Determinantes y composición del endeudamiento público en Colombia," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2110, Inter-American Development Bank.
    5. Thomas A. Garrett & Russell S. Sobel, 2004. "State Lottery Revenue: The Importance of Game Characteristics," Public Finance Review, , vol. 32(3), pages 313-330, May.
    6. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    7. Venkatesh Shankar & Pablo Azar & Matthew Fuller, 2008. "—: A Multicategory Brand Equity Model and Its Application at Allstate," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 567-584, 07-08.
    8. Giuseppe Croce & Emanuela Ghignoni, 2011. "Overeducation and spatial flexibility in Italian local labour markets," Working Papers in Public Economics 145, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.
    9. Cuesta, Lizeth & Ruiz, Yomara, 2021. "Efecto de la globalización sobre la desigualdad. Un estudio global para 104 países usando regresiones cuantílicas [Effect of globalization on inequality. A global study for 104 countries using quan," MPRA Paper 111022, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Peppel-Srebrny, Jemima, 2021. "Not all government budget deficits are created equal: Evidence from advanced economies' sovereign bond markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    11. Meghamrita Chakraborty, 2023. "Linking Migration, Diversity and Regional Development in India," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 8(1), pages 55-72, January.
    12. Jessica M. Mc Lay & Roy Lay-Yee & Barry J. Milne & Peter Davis, 2015. "Regression-Style Models for Parameter Estimation in Dynamic Microsimulation: An Empirical Performance Assessment," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 8(2), pages 83-127.
    13. Susan Woodward, 1982. "Strike Activity and Wage Settlements," UCLA Economics Working Papers 249, UCLA Department of Economics.
    14. Machado, Matilde P., 2001. "Dollars and performance: treating alcohol misuse in Maine," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 639-666, July.
    15. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Imperiale, Francesca & Pizzi, Simone & Lippolis, Stella, 2023. "Sustainability reporting and ESG performance in the utilities sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    17. Manganaris, Panayotis & Beccalli, Elena & Dimitropoulos, Panagiotis, 2017. "Bank transparency and the crisis," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 121-137.
    18. Marcela Parada-Contzen & Andrés Riquelme-Won & Felipe Vasquez-Lavin, 2013. "The value of a statistical life in Chile," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 1073-1087, December.
    19. Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Tselios, Vassilis & Winkler, Deborah & Farole, Thomas, 2013. "Geography and the Determinants of Firm Exports in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 225-240.
    20. Heather Antecol & Kelly Bedard, 2004. "The Racial Wage Gap: The Importance of Labor Force Attachment Differences across Black, Mexican, and White Men," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 39(2).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H3 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents
    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods

    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:scippl:v:29:y:2002:i:5:p:314-330. 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/spp .

    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.