Abstract
The paper assesses the draft weighting system used by the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) scheme for measuring the output of refereed economics journal articles. It does so by using data from New Zealand's economics departments to demonstrate how the rankings of departmental and individual researchers are affected by the use of ERA weights rather than alternative weights employed in the economics literature. It concludes that the draft version of the ERA scheme, as released in August 2008, rewards research quantity over research quality, as traditionally defined.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
