IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare01/125654.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

R&D expenditure, R&D evaluation, and the advent of collaborative R&D with reference to the Australian sugar industry

Author

Listed:
  • Henderson, Tracy M.

Abstract

Various forms of research and development (R&D) activities have evolved over the past few centuries as part of the scientific system. Of particular interest is the unique pattern of R&D activities that have developed within agricultural and natural resource sectors. The evolution of collaborative research in its many forms including single disciplinary, multi disciplinary and researcher-stakeholder collaborative research is documented with special attention paid to economic research evaluation techniques that have been developed over the past half century. Existing economic evaluation techniques focus predominantly on evaluating the outputs and outcomes of research, and exclude evaluation of the R&D process. Furthermore, existing evaluation techniques emphasise the economic value of scientific aspects of research, but do not accommodate various socio-economic, managerial and other important aspects that reflect the wider value of research to individual participants, project teams or organisations. There is a need to address this gap in knowledge and develop a framework to evaluate the various scientific, economic, socio-economic and managerial aspects of collaborative research in a holistic manner. The researcherstakeholder collaborative research approach as advocated by the Australian Cooperative Research Centre Program is of particular interest. Key aspects to be included in a holistic, pluralist evaluation framework are presented. Application of a holistic evaluation framework is anticipated to result in the justification or otherwise of the trend toward collaborative research in Australia, as well as providing the opportunity for participants and managers of researcher-stakeholder collaborative research to improve the conduct and management of this form of research.

Suggested Citation

  • Henderson, Tracy M., 2001. "R&D expenditure, R&D evaluation, and the advent of collaborative R&D with reference to the Australian sugar industry," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 125654, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare01:125654
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.125654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/125654/files/Henderson.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.125654?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    2. Maxwell, Judith A. & Randall, Alan, 1989. "Ecological economic modeling in a pluralistic, participatory society," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 233-249, October.
    3. Benoît Godin & Yves Gingras, 2000. "Impact of collaborative research on academic science," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 65-73, February.
    4. Robinson, Jackie, 2000. "Does MODSS offer an alternative to traditional approaches to natural resource management decision making?," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123726, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Malcolm, Bill, 2000. "Farm Management Economic Analysis: A Few Disciplines, a Few Perspectives, a Few Figurings, a Few Futures," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 171920, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    6. Unknown, 2001. "Program: AARES 45th Annual Conference," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 171977, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Nelson, A. Gene, 2000. "Partnership Opportunities Between Academia And The Private Sector: Examples From The Texas A&M University System," Faculty Paper Series 24008, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    8. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Brennan, Lisa E., 2000. "Redefining economic efficiency using a case study of sugarcane harvest-transport systems. A job for pluralist thinking," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123610, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    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. Henderson, Tracy M., 2003. "Evaluation Of Collaborative Research And Development: Insights From A Survey Of Sugar Industry Researchers," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57889, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Henderson, Tracy M., 2002. "Evaluating the performance of collaborative research and development activities," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125110, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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. Henderson, Tracy M., 2002. "Evaluating the performance of collaborative research and development activities," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125110, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    3. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    4. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    5. Thomas Bolli & Jörg Schläpfer, 2015. "Job mobility, peer effects, and research productivity in economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 629-650, September.
    6. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    7. Xiaowen Xi & Jiaqi Wei & Ying Guo & Weiyu Duan, 2022. "Academic collaborations: a recommender framework spanning research interests and network topology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6787-6808, November.
    8. Chaocheng He & Jiang Wu & Qingpeng Zhang, 2021. "Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4005-4037, May.
    9. Gómez-Ferri, Javier & González-Alcaide, Gregorio & LLopis-Goig, Ramón, 2019. "Measuring dissatisfaction with coauthorship: An empirical approach based on the researchers’ perception," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    10. Simon Hussain & Lana Liu & Yue Wang & Lingyan Zuo, 2015. "Journal Rankings, Collaborative Research and Publication Strategies: Evidence from China," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 233-255, June.
    11. Cristina Gomes Souza & Marta Lúcia Azevedo Ferreira, 2013. "Researchers profile, co-authorship pattern and knowledge organization in information science in Brazil," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 673-687, May.
    12. Shen, Hongquan & Xie, Juan & Ao, Weiyi & Cheng, Ying, 2022. "The continuity and citation impact of scientific collaboration with different gender composition," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    13. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi & Jaeyun Kim, 2011. "The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 967-983, December.
    14. Carla Taramasco & Jean-Philippe Cointet & Camille Roth, 2010. "Academic team formation as evolving hypergraphs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 721-740, December.
    15. Maria Rosaria Carillo & Erasmo Papagni & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise (2001-2003)," Discussion Papers 4_2012, CRISEI, University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    16. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    17. Chin-Chang Tsai & Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Collaboration experiences across scientific disciplines and cohorts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 505-529, August.
    18. Celis, Sergio & Kim, Jeongeun, 2018. "The making of homophilic networks in international research collaborations: A global perspective from Chilean and Korean engineering," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 573-582.
    19. Alberto Baccini & Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Normative versus strategic accounts of acknowledgment data: The case of the top-five journals of economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 603-635, January.
    20. Sabharwal, Meghna & Hu, Qian, 2013. "Participation in university-based research centers: Is it helping or hurting researchers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1301-1311.

    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:ags:aare01:125654. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.