Publication-Based Funding: The Norwegian Model

Abstract

The 'Norwegian Model' attempts to comprehensively cover all the peerreviewed scholarly literatures in all areas of research-including the preferred formats and languages of scholarly publishing in the humanities-in one single weighted indicator which makes the research efforts comparable across departments and faculties within and between research institutions. This article describes the main components of the model and how it has been implemented, as well as the effects and experiences in three of the countries that are making use of the model, and where it has been evaluated: Belgium (Flanders), Denmark and Norway. The article concludes with a discussion of the model from the perspective of the humanities.

Unique, but still best practice? The Research Excellence Framework (REF) from an international perspective

“…The data source is in this case not Web of Science or Scopus, but the nationally integrated Current Research Information System in Norway (CRIStin). Owing to the bibliometric indicator used in institutional funding (see below), this system has comprehensive coverage all peerreviewed scholarly publishing in the country, also in the formats and languages that are practiced in the humanities (Sivertsen, 2016).…”

“…It also has an indicator-based PRFS in which one of the indicators is bibliometric. This indicator, known as the "Norwegian Model" (Schneider, 2009;Ahlgren et al, 2012;Sivertsen, 2016), has so far been adopted at the national level by Denmark, Finland and Norway, partly also by Belgium (Flanders), as well as at the local level by several Swedish universities. In its section on Denmark, The Metric Tide report describes it as "primarily a distribution model".…”

“…An overview is given by Sivertsen (2016). Most of what is known about its effects comes from a relatively thorough evaluation that was initiated in 2012 by the Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (representing the funded organizations) in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and Research (the funding organization).…”

Research assessment in the UK and Italy: Costly and difficult, but probably worth it (at least for a while)

“…In the period 2009/2010/2015 results were used to inform funding councils in the context of a QR allocation of about €11.875bn to universities in the UK, representing about 32% of total public research funds, approximately 20% of total funding council grants, and 14% of UK HEIs' total government funding. The total estimated internal and university costs for RAE2008 were €88.5m, accounting for 0.75% of the QR allocation over the period considered.…”

Bridging the Evaluation Gap

“…in the UK) whereas in others they are not (e.g. in the Netherlands) (Hicks 2012;Aagaard, Bloch, and Schneider 2015;VSNU, NWO, and KNAW 2015;Wilsdon et al 2015;Sivertsen 2016;Whitley and Gläser 2007). This policy context has strongly shaped the discourse in the form of a dichotomy between indicator-driven or peer review based research evaluation, also with respect to other forms of evaluation (e.g.…”