IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/5415.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Top Research Productivity and its Persistence

Author

Listed:
  • Kelchtermans, Stijn
  • Veugelers, Reinhilde

Abstract

The paper contributes to the debate on cumulative advantage effects in academic research by examining top performance in research and its persistence over time, using a panel dataset comprising the publications of biomedical and exact scientists at the KU Leuven in the period 1992-2001. We study the selection of researchers into productivity categories and analyse how they switch between these categories over time. About 25% achieves top performance at least once, while 5% is persistently top. Analysing the hazard to first and subsequent top performance shows strong support for an accumulative process. Rank, gender, hierarchical position and past performance are highly significant explanatory factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelchtermans, Stijn & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "Top Research Productivity and its Persistence," CEPR Discussion Papers 5415, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:5415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=5415
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    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. Levin, Sharon G & Stephan, Paula E, 1991. "Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 114-132, March.
    2. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    3. Pakes, Ariel & Ericson, Richard, 1998. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 1-45, March.
    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. Pedro Albarrán & Raquel Carrasco & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2017. "Are Migrants More Productive Than Stayers? Some Evidence From A Set Of Highly Productive Academic Economists," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(3), pages 1308-1323, July.
    2. Stijn Kelchtermans & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2011. "The great divide in scientific productivity: why the average scientist does not exist," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 295-336, February.
    3. Clément Bosquet & Pierre‐Philippe Combes & Cecilia García‐Peñalosa, 2019. "Gender and Promotions: Evidence from Academic Economists in France," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1020-1053, July.
    4. Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2013. "The role of statistics in establishing the similarity of citation distributions in a static and a dynamic context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 173-181, July.
    5. Bosquet, Clément & Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Garcia-Penalosa, Cecilia, 2013. "Gender and competition: evidence from academic promotions in France," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58350, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Raquel Carrasco & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2014. "The Evolution Of The Scientific Productivity Of Highly Productive Economists," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Clément Bosquet & Pierre-Philippe Combes & Cecila Garcia-Penalosa, 2013. "Gender and Competition: Evidence from Academic Promotions in France," SERC Discussion Papers 0147, Spatial Economics Research Centre, LSE.
    8. Fogarty, Timothy J. & Zimmerman, Aleksandra B. & Richardson, Vernon J., 2016. "What do we mean by accounting program quality? A decomposition of accounting faculty opinions," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 16-42.
    9. Albarrán, Pedro & Carrasco, Raquel & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2015. "The effect of spatial mobility and other factors on academic productivity : some evidence from a set of highly productive economists," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1415, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    10. Tuomas Höylä & Christoph Bartneck & Timo Tiihonen, 2016. "The consequences of competition: simulating the effects of research grant allocation strategies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 263-288, July.
    11. Bosquet, Clément & Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Garcia-Penalosa, Cecilia, 2013. "Gender and competition: evidence from academic promotions in France," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58350, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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 & Jing Xiao, 2014. "Entrepreneurship and survival over the business cycle: how do new technology-based firms differ?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 411-426, August.
    2. Andersson, Fredrik & Vejsiu, Altin, 2001. "Determinants of plant closures in Swedish manufacturing," Working Paper Series 2001:6, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    3. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Rosina Moreno, 2005. "Firm Competitive Strategies And The Likelihood Of Survival - The Spanish Case," ERSA conference papers ersa05p347, European Regional Science Association.
    4. Agustí Segarra & Maria Callejón, 2002. "New Firms' Survival and Market Turbulence: New Evidence from Spain," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Alex Coad, 2018. "Firm age: a survey," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 13-43, January.
    6. Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Henry van der Wiel & Nick Zubanov & Ruslan Lukach & Bert Minne, 2009. "Relation entry, exit and productivity: an overview of recent theoretical and empirical literature," CPB Document 180.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    7. Chung-Yi Tse, 2008. "Diffusion with variable production lead times," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 177-202, March.
    8. Josep-Maria Arauzo-Carod & Agustí Segarra-Blasco, 2005. "The Determinants of Entry are not Independent of Start-up Size: Some Evidence from Spanish Manufacturing," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 27(2), pages 147-165, September.
    9. Jason P. Brown & Dayton M. Lambert & Raymond J. G. M. Florax, 2013. "The Birth, Death, and Persistence of Firms: Creative Destruction and the Spatial Distribution of U.S. Manufacturing Establishments, 2000–2006," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 89(3), pages 203-226, July.
    10. Jeffrey R. Campbell & Hugo A. Hopenhayn, 2005. "Market Size Matters," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 1-25, March.
    11. Laura Resmini & Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti, 2020. "Home bias in divestment decisions of multinational corporations in the EU," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 799-813, August.
    12. F. Voulgaris & G. Agiomirgianakis & T. Papadogonas, 2015. "Job creation and job destruction in economic crisis at firm level: the case of Greek manufacturing sectors," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 21-39, March.
    13. Petrakis, Emmanuel & Roy, Santanu, 1999. "Cost-Reducing Investment, Competition, and Industry Dynamics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(2), pages 381-401, May.
    14. Nicolas Berman & Vincent Rebeyrol & Vincent Vicard, 2019. "Demand Learning and Firm Dynamics: Evidence from Exporters," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(1), pages 91-106, March.
    15. Andrew Eckert & Douglas West, 2008. "Firm Survival and Chain Growth in a Privatized Retail Liquor Store Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 32(1), pages 1-18, February.
    16. Francesca Lotti & Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2009. "Defending Gibrat’s Law as a long-run regularity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 31-44, January.
    17. Tran, Hien Thu, 2019. "Institutional quality and market selection in the transition to market economy," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1-1.
    18. Guidi, Francesco & Solomon, Edna & Trushin, Eshref & Ugur, Mehmet, 2015. "Inverted-U relationship between innovation and survival: Evidence from firm-level UK data," EconStor Preprints 110896, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. Jozef Konings & Ana Xavier, 2002. "Firm Growth and Survival in a Transition Country: Micro Evidence from Slovenia," LICOS Discussion Papers 11402, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    20. Paulo Bastos & Daniel A. Dias & Olga A. Timoshenko, 2018. "Learning, prices and firm dynamics," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(4), pages 1257-1311, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economics of science; hazard models; research productivity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:5415. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.