On the Robustness of Alternative Rankings Methodologies: Australian and New Zealand Economics Departments, 1988-2002
Just as friendly arguments based on an ignorance of facts eventually led to the creation of the definitive Guinness Book of World Records, any argument about university rankings has seemingly been a problem without a solution. To state the obvious, alternative rankings methodologies can and do lead to different rankings. This paper evaluates the robustness of rankings of Australian and New Zealand economics teaching departments for 1988-2002 and 1996-2002 using alternative rankings methodologies, and compares the results with the rankings obtained by Macri and Sinha (2006). In the overall mean rankings for both 1988-2006 and 1996-2002, the University of Melbourne is ranked first, followed by UWA and ANU.
|Date of creation:||23 Feb 2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Joseph Macri & Dipendra Sinha, 2006. "Rankings Methodology for International Comparisons of Institutions and Individuals: an Application to Economics in Australia and New Zealand," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 111-156, 02.
- Scott, Loren C & Mitias, Peter M, 1996. "Trends in Rankings of Economics Departments in the U.S.: An Update," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(2), pages 378-400, April.
- Jerry G. Thursby, 2000. "What Do We Say about Ourselves and What Does It Mean? Yet Another Look at Economics Department Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 383-404, June.
- Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
- Michael McAleer, 2005. "The ten commandments for ranking university quality," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 649-653, 09.
- John Gibson, 2000. "Research productivity in New Zealand university economics departments: Comment and update," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 73-87.
- Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2003.
"Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics,"
Journal of the European Economic Association,
MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1346-1366, December.
- Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2001. "Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics," Discussion Papers in Economics 01/8, Department of Economics, University of Leicester.
- Graves, Philip E & Marchand, James R & Thompson, Randal, 1982. "Economics Departmental Rankings: Research Incentives, Constraints, and Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1131-41, December.
- Ian King, 2001.
"Quality versus quantity: Ranking research records of economics departments in New Zealand,"
New Zealand Economic Papers,
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 240-252.
- Ian King, 2002. "Quality versus quantity: Ranking research records of economics departments in New Zealand," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 97-112.
- Richard Dusansky & Clayton J. Vernon, 1998. "Rankings of U.S. Economics Departments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 157-170, Winter.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:2881. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.