IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Determinants of Research Production by U.S. Universities

  • Quentin David

    ()

    (CREA, University of Luxembourg)

In this paper, we analyze the determinants of the production of research by higher edu- cation institutions in the U.S.. We use the information contained in the Shanghai ranking to estimate their performance in the production of top level academic research. We show that it is important to account for the presence of outliers, in both dimensions (x and y axes), among institutions. It appears that most of the top ranked institutions must be con- sidered as outliers. We also treat the endogeneity issue and test for the possible selection bias. We find that the income, the share of this income devoted to expenses in research and the number of professors very significantly increase the ability of an institution to produce top level academic research. We also show that the relationship between the average quality (salary) of professors and the production of research is U-shaped with a significant share of institutions located on the decreasing part of the curve.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://wwwen.uni.lu/content/download/24332/294821/file/2009-16_The%20Determinants%20of%20Research%20Production%20by%20U.S.%20Universities.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Center for Research in Economic Analysis, University of Luxembourg in its series CREA Discussion Paper Series with number 09-16.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:luc:wpaper:09-16
Contact details of provider: Postal: 162a avenue de la Faïencerie, L-1511 Luxembourg
Phone: (+352) 46 66 44
Fax: (+352) 46 66 44 ext 633
Web page: http://wwwen.uni.lu/research/fdef/creaEmail:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Charles T. Clotfelter, 1999. "The Familiar but Curious Economics of Higher Education: Introduction to a Symposium," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 3-12, Winter.
  2. Gordon C. Winston, 1999. "Subsidies, Hierarchy and Peers: The Awkward Economics of Higher Education," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 13-36, Winter.
  3. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2005. "Academic Freedom, Private-Sector Focus, and the Process of Innovation," NBER Working Papers 11542, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Michael S. McPherson & Morton Owen Schapiro, 1999. "Tenure Issues in Higher Education," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 85-98, Winter.
  5. Ronald G. Ehrenberg, 1999. "Adam Smith Goes to College: An Economist Becomes an Academic Administrator," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 99-116, Winter.
  6. Wasmer, Etienne, 2002. "Interpreting Europe and US Labor Markets Differences: The Specificity of Human Capital Investments," IZA Discussion Papers 549, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  7. Vincenzo Verardi & Christophe Croux, 2009. "Robust regression in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(3), pages 439-453, September.
  8. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
  9. Claudia Goldin & Lawrence F. Katz, 1998. "The Shaping of Higher Education: The Formative Years in the United States, 1890 to 1940," NBER Working Papers 6537, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
  11. Catherine Dehon & Marjorie Gassner & Vincenzo Verardi, 2008. "A New Hausmann Type Test to Detect the Presence of Influential Outliers," Working Papers ECARES 2008_006, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  12. Thomas J. Kane & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 1999. "The Community College: Educating Students at the Margin between College and Work," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 63-84, Winter.
  13. Michael P. Murray, 2006. "Avoiding Invalid Instruments and Coping with Weak Instruments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 111-132, Fall.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:luc:wpaper:09-16. 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: (Elisa Ferreira)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.