RePEc Click here to visit UConn Economics IDEAS

This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Top 5% Institutions and Economists in the Field of Resource Economics, as of January 2010

This page shows one of the many rankings computed with RePEc data. They are based on data about authors who have registered with the RePEc Author Service, institutions listed on EDIRC, bibliographic data collected by RePEc, citation analysis performed by CitEc and popularity data compiled by LogEc. To find more rankings, historical data and detailed methodology, click here. Or see the ranking FAQ. For Resource Economics, these are 89 authors affiliated with 355 institutions.
All authors classified in this field.

Top 5% institutions in the field of Resource Economics

The scores of institutions in each field are determined by a weighted sum of all authors affiliated with the respective institutions. The weights are determined, for each author, by the proportion of all working papers announced in NEP that have also been announced in NEP-RES (Resource Economics).
RankScoreInstitution
11.25Economics Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge
22.01Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakutät, Universität Zürich, Zürich
(3)3.03Institut für Empirische Wirtschaftsforschung (IEW), Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakutät, Universität Zürich, Zürich
34.02Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Bedrijfskunde, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
45.15Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge
(5)5.32Afdeling Ruimtelijke Economie, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Bedrijfskunde, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
(5)7.11Center for Business and Government, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge
58.73Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA), Basel/Zürich
(6)9.32School of Economics and Finance, Faculty of Business, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
69.32Faculty of Business, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
711.62Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley
812.61Economics Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
912.9Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), Dublin
1014.62Department of Economics, Northwestern University, Evanston
1116.53Handelshögskolan, Göteborgs Universitet, Göteborg
1217.63Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge
(13)18.15Department of Finance, College of Business, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign
1318.15College of Business, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign
1418.59Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland, College Park
1518.86Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), Toulouse
1620.41Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
(17)20.75Nationalekonomiska institutionen, Handelshögskolan, Göteborgs Universitet, Göteborg
1721.76Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB), Athens

Top 5% authors in the field of Resource Economics

This ranking is based on registered authors only, and only those who are classified within
this field. Authors can register at the RePEc Author Service.
RankScoreAuthor
1.1.41Peter Nijkamp
2.1.43Jeffrey Alexander Frankel
3.4.72Elinor Ostrom
4.5.18Anastasios Xepapadeas

The data presented here is experimental. It is based on a limited sample of the research output in Economics and Finance. Only material catalogued in RePEc is considered. For any citation based criterion, only works that could be parsed by the CitEc project are considered. For any ranking of people, only those registered with the RePEc Author Service can be taken into account. And for rankings of institutions, only those listed in EDIRC and claimed as affiliation by the respective, registered authors can be measured. Thus, this list is by no means based on a complete sample. You can help making this more comprehensive by encouraging more publications to be listed (instructions) and more authors to register (form). For more details on the various rankings that are available as well for documentation, follow this link.

Credits:

We do our best, but we cannot exclude errors.