Because of the potential to increase economic growth, many governments around the world have increased resources devoted to universities, which play a central role for social and economic development. The ability to succeed in promoting qualified employment and economic progress, however, strictly depends on how resources are allocated within the university system and on the productivity and efficiency of the system itself. The measurement of the efficiency of universities, however, is a difficult task. In particular, there is no universally accepted theory or methodology to define a system of weights able to capture the relative importance of research, teaching (both undergraduate and postgraduate), patenting, university-industry collaboration, public policy activities, and so on. On the other hand, universities possess internal organizational structures and decision-making processes, which can have a great influence on their performance. Hence, at least to some extent, universities do have strategies, in the sense that they try to choose among different combinations of inputs and to compete in different regions of the multidimensional outcome space. Although a growing literature witnesses these phenomena, it is difficult to assess its impact on university positioning and performance (Bonaccorsi and Daraio, 2006). Traditional econometric techniques in the economics of higher education are unsatisfactory to accomplish these difficult tasks (Marsh, 2004). We apply the recently introduced conditional nonparametric and robust measures of efficiency (Daraio and Simar, 2005a,2005b, 2006) to shed light on some of the most debated issues in the economics of science and higher education. This paper presents the first empirical evidence on the characterization of the European University System based on quantitative micro data. It exploits an original database built within the AQUAMETH Project (Advanced Quantitative Methods for Evaluating the performance of Public Sector Research), under the PRIME European Network of Excellence. Instead of analyzing data aggregated at country level (from OECD or Eurostat sources) or investigating the profile of individual universities through case studies, the AQUAMETH project collected micro data on all individual universities in 6 countries: Italy, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, Norway and UK, from 1995 to 2003. Taking into account all the methodological problems a comparison between institutions and across countries is made possible (Bonaccorsi, Daraio and Lepori, 2005). We find evidence of a trade-off between teaching and research, of economies of scale in teaching and a positive contribution of PhD on research productivity at European level. Interestingly, we find also that national patterns are at place showing a differentiated European university system. The policy implications of these findings are discussed; some recommendations and further development of the analysis are also outlined.
Bonaccorsi A., Daraio C., Simar L. (2006). A Comparative Efficiency Analysis on the European University System. First evidence of a characterization at micro level based on nonparametric methods. NEW YORK : s.n.
A Comparative Efficiency Analysis on the European University System. First evidence of a characterization at micro level based on nonparametric methods
DARAIO, CINZIA;
2006
Abstract
Because of the potential to increase economic growth, many governments around the world have increased resources devoted to universities, which play a central role for social and economic development. The ability to succeed in promoting qualified employment and economic progress, however, strictly depends on how resources are allocated within the university system and on the productivity and efficiency of the system itself. The measurement of the efficiency of universities, however, is a difficult task. In particular, there is no universally accepted theory or methodology to define a system of weights able to capture the relative importance of research, teaching (both undergraduate and postgraduate), patenting, university-industry collaboration, public policy activities, and so on. On the other hand, universities possess internal organizational structures and decision-making processes, which can have a great influence on their performance. Hence, at least to some extent, universities do have strategies, in the sense that they try to choose among different combinations of inputs and to compete in different regions of the multidimensional outcome space. Although a growing literature witnesses these phenomena, it is difficult to assess its impact on university positioning and performance (Bonaccorsi and Daraio, 2006). Traditional econometric techniques in the economics of higher education are unsatisfactory to accomplish these difficult tasks (Marsh, 2004). We apply the recently introduced conditional nonparametric and robust measures of efficiency (Daraio and Simar, 2005a,2005b, 2006) to shed light on some of the most debated issues in the economics of science and higher education. This paper presents the first empirical evidence on the characterization of the European University System based on quantitative micro data. It exploits an original database built within the AQUAMETH Project (Advanced Quantitative Methods for Evaluating the performance of Public Sector Research), under the PRIME European Network of Excellence. Instead of analyzing data aggregated at country level (from OECD or Eurostat sources) or investigating the profile of individual universities through case studies, the AQUAMETH project collected micro data on all individual universities in 6 countries: Italy, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, Norway and UK, from 1995 to 2003. Taking into account all the methodological problems a comparison between institutions and across countries is made possible (Bonaccorsi, Daraio and Lepori, 2005). We find evidence of a trade-off between teaching and research, of economies of scale in teaching and a positive contribution of PhD on research productivity at European level. Interestingly, we find also that national patterns are at place showing a differentiated European university system. The policy implications of these findings are discussed; some recommendations and further development of the analysis are also outlined.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
