|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2012‒05‒22
five papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Timo Boppart; Kevin E. Staub |
| Abstract: | A key aspect of generating new ideas is drawing from different elements of preexisting knowledge and combining them into a new idea. In such a process, the diversity of ideas plays a central role. This paper examines the empirical question of how the internet affected the diversity of new research by making the existing literature accessible online. The internet marks a technological shock which affects how academic scientists search for and browse through published documents. Using article-level data from economics journals for the period 1991 to 2009, we document how online accessibility lead academic economists to draw from a more diverse set of literature, and to write articles which incorporated more diverse contents. |
| Keywords: | Digitization, online publication, bibliometrics, knowledge production function, recombinant growth, citations, networks, scholarly communication |
| JEL: | A11 D83 O31 O33 |
| Date: | 2012–05 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zur:econwp:075&r=sog |
| By: | Jellal, Mohamed; Faria, Joao; Elaoufi, Noureddine |
| Abstract: | This paper models a dynamic scholar’s allocation of time between academia and professional activities outside academia, given the academic labor market and social interactions. The model shows how particularly in less developed countries business and political networks may have large negative externalities for academic research culture and then for university system performance. The conclusion part of the paper offers a brief discussion on policy recommendations to stimulate academic research productivity. |
| Keywords: | Economics of science; network externalities; rent seeking |
| JEL: | I2 I23 |
| Date: | 2012 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:38711&r=sog |
| By: | Schymura, Michael; Löschel, Andreas |
| Abstract: | We examine the incidence and extent of co-authorship and intellectual collaboration in the leading journal of environmental and resource economics: the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Previous studies of general economic journals have offered empirical evidence for the fact that intellectual collaboration is most prevalent in the field of environmental and resource economics. However, no previous study has examined this finding more carefully. This is a gap in the literature we hope to fill. Accordingly, we investigate all 1436 papers published in JEEM from 1974 until 2010 with respect to potential drivers of co-authorship. We start with a simple descriptive analysis in order to depict the most important trends in the past 36 years. We then employ empirical methods to test several hypotheses that are commonly used to analyze the structure of co-authorship. However, we do not stick to the commonly used hypotheses but investigate also other potentially relevant drivers of co-authorship as e.g. the acknowledgment of external funding, the gender of the authors or the geographical location. We find empirical support for the rising incidence of co-authorship with increasing complexity of the field of economics and the competition for external funding. As research has become more demanding in terms of both disciplinary and - especially in the field of environmental and resource economics - interdisciplinary skills, the likelihood of collaborative research and jointly written publications increased. -- |
| Keywords: | environmental and resource economics,co-authorship,production of knowledge |
| JEL: | Q0 Q50 |
| Date: | 2012 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:12029&r=sog |
| By: | Yann Kossi (GATE Lyon Saint-Etienne - Groupe d'analyse et de théorie économique - CNRS : UMR5824 - Université Lumière - Lyon II - École Normale Supérieure - Lyon); Jean-Yves Lesueur (GATE Lyon Saint-Etienne - Groupe d'analyse et de théorie économique - CNRS : UMR5824 - Université Lumière - Lyon II - École Normale Supérieure - Lyon); Mareva Sabatier (IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - Université de Savoie) |
| Abstract: | L'article étudie les déterminants de la production scientifique des enseignant-chercheurs français en économie en mobilisant des données originales issues des candidatures aux campagnes nationales 2009 et 2010 de la " Prime d'Excellence Scientifique ". L'échantillon constitué à partir de cette expérience permet d'évaluer les performances individuelles en matière de production scientifique dans un contexte de compétition académique typique des modèles de tournoi. Les publications des candidats sont mesurées dans une fenêtre temporelle identique couvrant la période 2005 à 2010 et un indice de production scientifique est construit à partir du classement CNRS des revues. L'estimation de fonctions de production scientifique de type Tobit et le recours à des estimations économétriques complémentaires par quantiles, permettent d'identifier l'existence d'un cycle de production scientifique associé à un effet Matthieu. L'article apporte deux contributions significatives par rapport aux travaux développés dans ce domaine par la littérature. Nous contrôlons le caractère multitâche des enseignants-chercheurs et nous identifions l'effet des externalités de voisinage sur les performances individuelles en matière de publication. Une dualité des régimes de production scientifique des enseignants-chercheurs en économie semble se dégager nettement à l'issue des estimations économétriques par quantiles. |
| Keywords: | Tournament theory; academic competition; scientific production; Lotka's law; network externalities |
| Date: | 2012–05–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00695917&r=sog |
| By: | Andrea Canidio |
| Abstract: | I explore the efficiency properties of a decentralized labor market for scientists. I use a model where firms produce science by building labs and hiring researchers in a competitive market. Firms may invest in science to produce new scientific knowledge or to increase their absorptive capacity: the ability to use scientific knowledge produced outside of the firm. In both cases firms underinvest in labs. More interestingly, when firms' investment in science is motivated by absorptive capacity, researchers and labs may be substitutes in the revenue function, even though they are complements in the research production function. This generates a novel form of inefficiency: for any given distribution of labs, the allocation of researchers to firms is non optimal. Subsidies to the investment in labs cannot restore the first best. I show that the existence of scientists' reputation concerns, by preventing the free transfer of surplus between firms and researchers, may affect the allocation of scientists to labs and increase total welfare. |
| Date: | 2012–05–15 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ceu:econwp:2012_7&r=sog |