The Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy

Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark: The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark : The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model. / Aagaard, Kaare.

In: Journal of Data and Information Science, Vol. 3, No. 4, 2018, p. 20-30.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Aagaard K. Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark: The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model. Journal of Data and Information Science. 2018;3(4):20-30. doi: 10.2478/jdis-2018-0018

Author

Aagaard, Kaare. / Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark : The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model. In: Journal of Data and Information Science. 2018 ; Vol. 3, No. 4. pp. 20-30.

Bibtex

@article{9f68147bd4e3444092b6af24a527d45b,
title = "Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark: The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model",
abstract = "The main goal of this study is to outline and analyze the Danish adoption and translation of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. The study takes the form of a policy analysis mainly drawing on document analysis of policy papers, previously published studies and grey literature. The study highlights a number of crucial factors that relate both to the Danish process and to the final Danish result underscoring that the Danish BFI model is indeed a quite different system than its Norwegian counterpart. One consequence of these process-and design differences is the fact that the broader legitimacy of the Danish BFI today appears to be quite poor. Reasons for this include: unclear and shifting objectives throughout the process; limited willingness to take ownership of the model among stakeholders; lack of communication throughout the implementation process and an apparent underestimation of the challenges associated with the use of bibliometric indicators. The conclusions of the study are based on the authors' interpretation of a long drawn and complex process with many different stakeholders involved. The format of this article does not allow for a detailed documentation of all elements, but further details can be provided upon request. The analysis may feed into current policy discussions on the future of the Danish BFI. Some elements of the present analysis have previously been published in Danish outlets, but this article represents the first publication on this issue targeting a broader international audience.",
keywords = "Bibliometrics, Norwegian Model, Performance based funding",
author = "Kaare Aagaard",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.2478/jdis-2018-0018",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "20--30",
journal = "Journal of Data and Information Science",
issn = "2096-157X",
publisher = "Chinese Academy of Sciences",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance-based Research Funding in Denmark

T2 - The Adoption and Translation of the Norwegian Model

AU - Aagaard, Kaare

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - The main goal of this study is to outline and analyze the Danish adoption and translation of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. The study takes the form of a policy analysis mainly drawing on document analysis of policy papers, previously published studies and grey literature. The study highlights a number of crucial factors that relate both to the Danish process and to the final Danish result underscoring that the Danish BFI model is indeed a quite different system than its Norwegian counterpart. One consequence of these process-and design differences is the fact that the broader legitimacy of the Danish BFI today appears to be quite poor. Reasons for this include: unclear and shifting objectives throughout the process; limited willingness to take ownership of the model among stakeholders; lack of communication throughout the implementation process and an apparent underestimation of the challenges associated with the use of bibliometric indicators. The conclusions of the study are based on the authors' interpretation of a long drawn and complex process with many different stakeholders involved. The format of this article does not allow for a detailed documentation of all elements, but further details can be provided upon request. The analysis may feed into current policy discussions on the future of the Danish BFI. Some elements of the present analysis have previously been published in Danish outlets, but this article represents the first publication on this issue targeting a broader international audience.

AB - The main goal of this study is to outline and analyze the Danish adoption and translation of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. The study takes the form of a policy analysis mainly drawing on document analysis of policy papers, previously published studies and grey literature. The study highlights a number of crucial factors that relate both to the Danish process and to the final Danish result underscoring that the Danish BFI model is indeed a quite different system than its Norwegian counterpart. One consequence of these process-and design differences is the fact that the broader legitimacy of the Danish BFI today appears to be quite poor. Reasons for this include: unclear and shifting objectives throughout the process; limited willingness to take ownership of the model among stakeholders; lack of communication throughout the implementation process and an apparent underestimation of the challenges associated with the use of bibliometric indicators. The conclusions of the study are based on the authors' interpretation of a long drawn and complex process with many different stakeholders involved. The format of this article does not allow for a detailed documentation of all elements, but further details can be provided upon request. The analysis may feed into current policy discussions on the future of the Danish BFI. Some elements of the present analysis have previously been published in Danish outlets, but this article represents the first publication on this issue targeting a broader international audience.

KW - Bibliometrics

KW - Norwegian Model

KW - Performance based funding

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058678853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2478/jdis-2018-0018

DO - 10.2478/jdis-2018-0018

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85058678853

VL - 3

SP - 20

EP - 30

JO - Journal of Data and Information Science

JF - Journal of Data and Information Science

SN - 2096-157X

IS - 4

ER -