The “Norwegian model” has become widely used for assessment and resource allocation purposes. This paper investigates why this model has becomes so widespread and influential.
A theoretical background is outlined in which the reduction of “uncertainty” is highlighted as a key feature of performance measurement systems. These theories are then drawn upon when revisiting previous studies of the Norwegian model, its use, and reactions to it, in Sweden.
The empirical examples, which concern more formal use on the level of universities as well as responses from individual researchers, shows how particular parts—especially the “publication indicator”—are employed in Swedish academia. The discussion posits that the attractiveness of the Norwegian model largely can be explained by its ability to reduce complexity and uncertainty, even in fields where traditional bibliometric measurement is less applicable.
The findings presented should be regarded as examples that can be used for discussion, but one should be careful to interpret these as representative for broader sentiments and trends.
The sheer popularity of the Norwegian model, leading to its application in contexts for which it was not designed, can be seen as a major challenge for the future.
This paper offers a novel perspective on the Norwegian model by focusing on its general “appeal”, rather than on its design, use or (mis)-use.
Emanuel Kulczycki and Przemysław Korytkowski
This study aims to present the key systemic changes in the Polish book evaluation model to focus on the publisher list, as inspired by the Norwegian Model.
In this study we reconstruct the framework of the 2010 and 2018 models of book evaluation in Poland within the performance-based research funding system.
For almost 20 years the book evaluation system in Poland has been based on the verification of various technical criteria (e.g. length of the book). The new 2018 model is based on the principle of prestige inheritance (a book is worth as much as its publisher is) and is inspired by the publisher list used in the Norwegian Model. In this paper, we argue that this solution may be a more balanced policy instrument than the previous 2010 model in which neither the quality of the publisher nor the quality of the book played any role in the evaluation.
We work from the framework of the 2018 model of book evaluation specified in the law on higher education and science from 20 July 2018, as implementation acts are not available yet.
This study may provide a valuable point of reference on how structural reforms in the research evaluation model were implemented on a country level. The results of this study may be interesting to policy makers, stakeholders and researchers focused on science policy.
This is the very first study that presents the new framework of the Polish research evaluation model and policy instruments for scholarly book evaluation. We describe what motivated policy makers to change the book evaluation model, and what arguments were explicitly raised to argue for the new solution.
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.
The “Norwegian Model” attempts to comprehensively cover all the peer-reviewed scholarly literatures in all areas of research in one single weighted indicator. Thereby, scientific production is made comparable across departments and faculties within and between research institutions, and the indicator may serve institutional evaluation and funding. This article describes the motivation for creating the model in Norway, how it was designed, organized and implemented, as well as the effects and experiences with the model. The article ends with an overview of a new type of bibliometric studies that are based on the type of comprehensive national publication data that the Norwegian Model provides.
Liam Cleere and Lai Ma
University College Dublin (UCD) has implemented the Output-Based Research Support Scheme (OBRSS) since 2016. Adapted from the Norwegian model, the OBRSS awards individual academic staff using a points system based on the number of publications and doctoral students. This article describes the design and implementation processes of the OBRSS, including the creation of the ranked publication list and points system and infrastructure requirements. Some results of the OBRSS will be presented, focusing on the coverage of publications reported in the OBRSS ranked publication list and Scopus, as well as information about spending patterns. Challenges such as the evaluation of the OBRSS in terms of fairness, transparency, and effectiveness will also be discussed.
Tim C. E. Engels and Raf Guns
The BOF-key is the performance-based research funding system that is used in Flanders, Belgium. In this paper we describe the historical background of the system, its current design and organization, as well as its effects on the Flemish higher education landscape. The BOF-key in its current form relies on three bibliometric parameters: publications in Web of Science, citations in Web of Science, and publications in a comprehensive regional database for SSH publications. Taken together, the BOF-key forms a unique variant of the Norwegian model: while the system to a large extent relies on a commercial database, it avoids the problem of inadequate coverage of the SSH. Because the bibliometric parameters of the BOF-key are reused in other funding allocation schemes, their overall importance to the Flemish universities is substantial.
The purpose of this article is to describe the development, components and properties of a publication indicator that the Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland uses for allocating direct core funding annually to universities. Since 2013, 13% of the core funding has been allocated on basis of publication indicator that, like the Norwegian model, is based on comprehensive national level publication data that is currently provided by the VIRTA publication information service. In 2015, the publication indicator was complemented with other components of the Norwegian model, namely, quality-weighted publication counts based on national Publication Forum authority list of the publication channels with ratings established by experts in the field. The funding model allocates around 1.6 billion euros annually to universities with the publication indicator annually distributing over 200 million euros. Besides the funding model, the indicator provides comparable data for monitoring the research performance of Finnish universities, fields and subunits. The indicator may also be used in the universities’ local funding models and research management systems, sometimes even at individual level evaluation. Positive and negative effects of the indicator have been extensively discussed and speculated. Since 2011, the Finnish universities’ productivity appears to have increased in terms of both quantity and quality of publications.
Saadia Karim, Tariq Rahim Soomro and S. M. Aqil Burney
Data has evolved into a large-scale data as big data in the recent era. The analysis of big data involves determined attempts on previous data. As new era of data has spatiotemporal facts that involve the time and space factors, which make them distinct from traditional data. The big data with spatiotemporal aspects helps achieve more efficient results and, therefore, many different types of frameworks have been introduced in cooperate world. In the present research, a qualitative approach is used to present the framework classification in two categories: architecture and features. Frameworks have been compared on the basis of architectural characteristics and feature attributes as well. These two categories project a significant effect on the execution of spatiotemporal data in big data. Frameworks are able to solve the real-time problems in less time of cycle. This study presents spatiotemporal aspects in big data with reference to several dissimilar environments and frameworks.
Evgeniya Danilova, Igor Kochegarov, Nikolay Yurkov, Mikhail Miheev and Normunds Kante
A number of PCB defects, though having passed successfully the defect identification procedure, can potentially grow into critical defects under the influence of various external and (or) internal influences. The complex nature of the development of defects leading to PCB failures demands developing and updating the data measuring systems not only for detection but also for the prediction of future development of PCB defects considering the external influences. To solve this problem, it is necessary to analyse the models of defect development, which will allow predicting the defect growth and working out the mathematical models for their studies.
The study uses the methods of system analysis, theory of mathematical and imitation modelling, analysis of technological systems. The article presents four models for determining the theoretical stress concentration factor for several types of common defects, considering the strength loss of PCB elements. For each model the evaluation of parameters determining its quality is also given. The formulas are given that link the geometry of defects and the stress concentration factor, corresponding to four types of defects. These formulas are necessary for determining the number of cycles and time to failure, fatigue strength coefficient.
The chosen models for determining the values of the stress concentration factor can be used as a database for identifying PCB defects. The proposed models are used for software implementation of the optical image inspection systems.