Search results

The key purpose of this study is to systematically examine the landscape of education research funded by the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) in China. The study aims to: (1) identify the thematic focus areas that reflect the national education agenda, (2) analyze the general funding patterns of education research projects and (3) gain insights into the distinctive nature of the research agenda in China. The study employs a rigorous data-driven approach to offer valuable insights into the dynamic discourses within the field of education research in China, which has received relatively little attention despite its potential significance.

In this study, we utilized word co-occurrence analysis and corpus-based frequency analysis to analyze the research projects funded by the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) from 2011 to 2020.

The key characteristics of these projects highlight the focus on higher education research, addressing the interests of specific cohorts of students, teachers and disadvantaged populations. Furthermore, these projects demonstrate a remarkable responsiveness to the policy needs of the country and a robust inclination toward an international comparative framework.

The findings offer valuable insights into the landscape and features of funded education research in China, revealing a strong emphasis on addressing practical needs and enhancing the capacity of the education system in the country.

This paper presents a systematic examination of the topics covered in funded research under the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) scheme from 2011 to 2020. It contributes to the advancement of understanding regarding knowledge traditions and practices in the Chinese context. Methodologically, this paper is the first in the literature to be prototyped with a word co-occurrence analysis approach to systematically investigate the funded education research in China. Additionally, it includes the development of a comprehensive corpus list to uncover the key characteristics of the funded projects. The analysis provides unique insights into the priorities and directions of education research supported by the Chinese government, which are of potential interest to international readers.

The paper develops a model for enhancing R&D productivity for Indian public funded laboratories. The paper utilizes the productivity data of five Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) laboratories for analysis and to form the constructs of the model.

The weighted average method was employed for analyzing the rankings of survey respondents pertaining to the significant measures enhancing R&D involvement of researchers and significant non-R&D jobs. The authors have proposed a model of productivity. Various individual, organizational and environmental constructs related to the researchers working in the CSIR laboratories have been outlined that can enhance R&D productivity of researchers in Indian R&D laboratories. Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to find the predictability of the productivity model.

The organizational factors have a crucial role in enhancing the R&D outputs of CSIR laboratories. The R&D productivity of researchers can be improved through implementing the constructs of the proposed model of productivity.

The R&D productivity model can be adapted by the R&D laboratories to enhance researchers’ R&D involvement, increased R&D outputs and achieving self-sustenance in long run.

The R&D laboratories can initiate exercises to explore the most relevant factors and measures to enhance R&D productivity of their researchers. The constructs of the model can function as a guideline to introduce the most preferable research policies in the laboratory for overall mutual growth of laboratory and the researchers.

Hardly any studies have been found that have focused on finding the measures of enhancing R&D involvement of researchers and the influence of significant time-intensive jobs on researchers’ productivity.

This paper aims to look at the implementation of project-funded research governance and its potential to induce organisational learning on responsible research and innovation (RRI). This paper analysed what types of organisational learning and change can take place within organisations of an Europe-funded project and to what extent. This paper examined whether and how change occurs and how it is shaped and co-produced with other orderings.

The paper is based on materials and evidence collected while working on the internal evaluation of a Horizon 2020-funded project. Analysis of the results of the mixed methods evaluation design was used to characterise occurrences of organisational learning and change.

The authors identified different forms of learning (single-loop learning, double-loop learning, reflexive and reflective learning and situational learning). The extent of learning that could lead to long-lasting organisational change was limited. This was due to the project-based and organisational design, the key-based definition of RRI and the indeterminacy of what constitutes learning and change – both at the level of funding and performing the project. For organisational change to occur, the authors argue for governance mechanisms based on reflexive learning that consider a range of structural conditions and measures.

Organisational learning plays an important role in change processes, which has so far been given too little consideration concerning the governance and implementation of RRI through project-based funding. The authors argue for a restructuring of governance and funding mechanisms to create more space for reflexivity and learning.

Internationalisation in higher education (HE) has always been romanticised and idealised but there has been limited focus on the internationalisation of gender equality and Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) certification and the role of international partnerships. Certification and Award Schemes (CAS), such as the Athena Swan Charter, can promote gender equality, best practices exchanges and foster institutional changes. Nevertheless, simply transferring strategies or frameworks without careful consideration of the nuances of the destination context can inadvertently lead to the perpetuation or exacerbation of gender inequalities and reproduce hierarchical relations between the Global South and North. Brazil's cultural and political context highlights the need for adapting the CAS framework to align with the unique conditions of the country, as well as institutional transformations in order to accommodate such a framework. This study aims to critically explore how gender equality and EDI certification can be internationalised in the Global South and how international partnerships can play a role in this process.

Building on a collaborative UK–Brazil funded project on advancing gender equality in Brazilian academia, we critically reflect on the assumptions of the funding call for operationalising international collaborations, and how we built solidarity – informed by our positionalities – against underlying colonial patterns. As part of our partnership, we were consulted to provide feedback on the introduction of an Athena SWAN framework in Brazil. We reflect on how the Athena Swan framework was “internationalised” in Brazil, especially in relation to its focus, the challenges of implementing gender equality and EDI efforts and the conditions required for such efforts to be meaningful in the Brazilian context. Thus, we assess and critically reflect on the current situation in Brazil, the role that certification can play for EDI and which conditions are required to enact change. In addition, we reflect on our positionalities and working practices as part of this collaboration as feminist researchers from different disciplinary and geographical backgrounds.

We trace colonial logics in the operationalisation of the funding scheme on setting international collaborations valorising the UK system and reinforcing geopolitical production of knowledge hierarchies between the Global North and Global South. Furthermore, reflecting on the Brazilian political, cultural context with a focus on HE we find similar challenges – to the UK – in implementing gender and EDI efforts. However, there are particular nuances in the Brazilian context that exacerbate these obstacles and make the implementation of an EDI certification framework in Brazil particularly challenging. Overcoming these barriers requires a collective effort from government, funding bodies, scientific associations and HE institutions, for the implementation of impactful and sustainable initiatives beyond mere rhetoric. Finally, while we had a positive collaboration, we felt ambivalent towards certain dimensions of the way the partnerships and the EDI internationalisation were operationalised.

We provide insights and practical recommendations that enhance the understanding of the issues surrounding the implementation of EDI efforts internationally such as CAS in the Brazilian context.

Reflecting on the internationalisation of EDI can lead to more tailored context-sensitive frameworks and activities that have the potential to influence societal attitudes and expectations towards gender roles and inclusivity, contributing to a more equitable and just society at large. It also touches upon the dynamics of international partnerships and collaborations across different contexts that can have implications for how such partnerships should be developed and funded beyond a mainstream colonial approach of “mentoring less advanced institutions”.

We reflect and critically discuss the internationalisation of EDI certification in HE and the role of international collaborations towards this process, a topic that has not been often examined within the literature on the internationalisation of HE as a romanticised and positive discourse. From our experience, we explore how such efforts can bring up ambivalence in the way they are operationalised and have the potential to both reinforce and disrupt colonial hierarchies.

COVID-19 has caused unprecedented disruption to health systems. There is much to be gained by capturing what was learned from changes and adaptations made by health services and systems. The Ministry of Health in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, sought to prioritise health services research (HSR) to address critical issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. We tested a priority setting methodology to create priorities for a specific funding opportunity and to extract generalisable lessons.

A virtual roundtable meeting of key stakeholders was held in June 2020. We used a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) for priority setting, with potential items (n = 35) grouped under headings. Data was analysed through a reflective deliberative process.

We engaged 89 senior policy makers, health service executives, clinicians and researchers in the roundtable. The NGT proved an efficient method with participants reaching consensus on eight priorities. Findings included strong support for learning from the rapid response to COVID-19 and addressing needs of vulnerable populations and the health workforce. Opinions differed about strategic areas investment and where learnings should be via internal evaluation rather than funded research. Three of the eight recommended priorities were included in the funding opportunity.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) required unprecedented change and adaptations within health systems, and rapid, applied health services research can help to create, understand and (where relevant) sustain change beyond the immediate impact of the pandemic. While final decisions may be dependent on a wider range of considerations by government, stakeholder enthusiasm for engagement in priority setting exercises may be dampened if they do not perceive their application in decision-making.

A modified nominal group technique can be used to set research priorities in constrained conditions by engaging large numbers of stakeholders in rankings and then using an online delivery of a roundtable and to reach consensus on priorities in real time. Recommended priorities for health services research can be readily generated through rapid engagement but does not guarantee their application.

Australia’s swift response to COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 was perceived as a relative success due to the rapid public health and policy response and a relatively low number of cases. This response was underpinned by systematic knowledge mobilisation including support for targeted and prioritised health services research to fill knowledge gaps.

Setting priority processes can provide rich, engaged input to support government funding decisions about HSR. A wide range of dynamic and iterative processes influence decision-making in a rapidly evolving situation in the health system response to COVID-19. It is crucial to consider how major investment decisions will support a value-based healthcare system.

This article explores whether six broad categories of activities undertaken by Canadian business scholars’ academics: publications record, citations record, teaching load, administrative load, consulting activities, and knowledge spillovers transfer, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to occur.

A multivariate probit model is estimated to take into account that business scholars have to consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake many different academic activities. Metrics from Google Scholar of scholars from 35 Canadian business schools, augmented by a survey data on factors explaining the productivity and impact performances of these faculty members, are used to explain the heterogeneities between the determinants of these activities.

Overall, the results reveal that there are complementarities between publications and citations, publications and knowledge spillovers transfer, citations and consulting, and between consulting and knowledge spillovers transfer. The results also suggest that there are substitution effects between publications and teaching, publications and administrative load, citations and teaching load, and teaching load and administrative load. Moreover, results show that public and private funding, business schools’ reputation, scholar’s relational resources, and business school size are among the most influential variables on the scholar’s portfolio of activities.

This study considers simultaneously the scholar’s whole portfolio of activities. Moreover, the determinants considered in this study to explain scholars’ engagement in different activities reconcile two conflicting perspectives: (1) the traditional self-managed approach of academics, and (2) the outcomes-focused approach of university management.

This study aims to analyze the adoption of open access (OA) publishing in social sciences within central universities in India, focusing on various aspects such as the growth of OA literature, the use of different OA routes and collaboration patterns in OA publications.

Ten central universities were selected based on their rankings in the National Institute Ranking Framework 2022. Data on OA publishing in social sciences were collected from the Social Science Citation Index of the Web of Science (WoS) database using the advanced search query “(CU=India OR AD=India) AND PY=(2003–2022) NOT PY=(2023).” Data analysis was conducted using MS Excel (v16.0), BibExcel (version 2017), Biblioshiny (version 4.1.2) and Google Open Refine (version 3.7).

The study found that 30.40% of total publications were OA, with BHU as leading institute in OA publishing. OA publishing in social sciences saw a consistent increase, peaking in 2022 with 209 publications. “Sustainability” and “Plos One” were among the top ten journals, with 103 and 34 OA papers, respectively. OA publications had a higher mean citation rate than closed access publications. Collaboration with seven and nine authors had higher mean citation rates, while six-author collaborations were lower. Indian researchers received the most citations collaborating with the USA, UK and Australia. The Netherlands and Saudi Arabia received the fewer citations, when collaborating with Indian authors.

The study’s main limitation is its reliance on WoS data, excluding many OA publications from smaller or specialized journals. Additionally, the focus on high-ranked central universities may not represent the entire academic landscape, as OA publishing patterns vary across other institutions and disciplines.

The study’s findings suggest that advancing OA publishing in social sciences at Indian universities requires raising awareness of OA concepts, enhancing institutional support and policies and informing researchers about funding opportunities. Emphasizing Gold OA and funding publication fees can broaden access to research. Universities with low OA ratios should adopt similar policies, mandate public research deposits and develop technical infrastructure. Encouraging multi-author collaborations can boost research impact and citation rates. Insights from the study can help institutions and policymakers shape effective OA strategies, enhancing the visibility and impact of social science research.

This is the first study analyzing the adoption of OA in the field of social sciences in high-ranked central universities in India. It has implications for promoting OA and increasing accessibility to research outputs. Universities with higher OA ratios can lead in this regard and encourage others to adopt similar practices for overall OA growth.

This study aims to highlight the growth and development of Indo-German collaborative research over the past three decades. Moreover, this study encompasses an in-depth examination of funding acknowledgements to gain valuable insights into the financial support that underpins these collaborative endeavours. Together with this paper, the authors provide an openly accessible data set of Indo-German research papers for further and reproducible research activities (the “Indo-German Literature Dataset”).

The data were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database from the year 1990 till the 30th of November 2022. A total of 36,999 records were retrieved against the used query. Acknowledged entities were extracted using a named entity recognition (NER) model specifically trained for this task. Interrelations between the extracted entities and scientific domains, lengths of acknowledgement texts, number of authors and affiliations, number of citations and gender of the first author, as well as collaboration patterns between Indian and German funders were examined.

The study reveals a consistent and increasing growth in the publication trend over the years. The study brings to light that Physics, Chemistry, Materials Science, Astronomy and Astrophysics and Engineering prominently dominate the Indo-German collaborative research. The USA, followed by England and France, are the most active collaborators in Indian and German research. Largely, research was funded by major German and Indian funding agencies, international corporations and German and American universities. Associations between the first author’s gender and acknowledged entity were observed. Additionally, relations between entity, entity type and scientific domain were discovered.

The study paves the way for enhanced collaboration, optimized resource utilization and societal advantages by offering a profound comprehension of the intricacies inherent in research partnerships between India and Germany. Implementation of the insights gleaned from this study holds the promise of cultivating a more resilient and influential collaborative research ecosystem between the two nations.

The study highlights a deeper understanding of the composition of the Indo-German collaborative research landscape of the past 30 years and its significance in advancing scientific knowledge and fostering international partnerships. Furthermore, the authors provide an open version of the original WoS data set. The Indo-German Literature Data set consists of 22,844 papers from OpenAlex and is available for related studies like literature studies and scientometrics.

This study analyzes the role of regional cooperative banks in identifying and financing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) from a proximity perspective. Access to finance is a major challenge for SMEs. Regional cooperative banks can remove this barrier based on cooperative bank's characteristics and geographic proximity to SMEs. Understanding the interplay between these financial actors and firms can contribute to a better support of SMEs development.

The results are based on a case study of eight SMEs located in southwestern France. Interviews were conducted with two regional cooperative funds and eight SMEs. The interview guide included questions related to the company, the projects financed and how financing was accessed.

Results reveal that a combination of three forms of proximity allows regional cooperative banks and SMEs to establish effective financing operations. They show that regional cooperative banks are key players in the existing financing mechanisms for SMEs. Such financing is often used to gain access to larger players at a later stage. The findings suggest the need for public policies that promote the integration of financing actors in regional ecosystems to advance SMEs' development.

This article examines how SMEs access financing, with a focus on regional cooperative banks, which have received little attention in the literature. Moreover, the relationships between these actors are studied through the lens of proximity. Regional cooperative banks are able to finance projects that may have been overlooked by traditional banks due to trust-building local dynamics.

Korea’s Institute for Basic Science (IBS), the first research institute dedicated to basic science in Korea, started ten years ago as part of a science policy called the Science Belt. It is noteworthy that Korea, with a short history of basic science, established such a research institute exclusively for basic science within a short period of time and made it one of the representative institutions of basic science in Korea. This paper aims to uncover the impetuses and constraints surrounding the policy of Science Belt, centering on the IBS.

Kingdon’s stream theory is used to clarify the factors that acted as impetuses or constraints for the Science Belt. For the analysis, in-depth interviews with the active policy participants were conducted in addition to the thorough literature review. The interviews enabled an in-depth understanding of the underlying factors for the Science Belt and the actual procedures of the policy decision.

This study found that the most powerful impetus in the Science Belt policymaking process was the President and a small group composed of a few scientists who played a leading role in the political stream. The constraint of the Science Belt was that the participation of scientist experts and governmental officials, the so-called invisible participants of Kingdon, was insignificant. In particular, there was no system in place to select policy alternatives for basic science through discussion between scientists and governmental officials.

The temporal scope of this study was limited to policy formation, that is, until the establishment of IBS. Therefore, future studies shall conduct a research on the implementation of the actual policy, IBS’s achievements and IBS’s impact of Korea’s basic science community.

This study applied both a theoretical framework and in-depth interviews along with the literature overview to understand a policymaking process from various angles.