The Flemish Performance-based Research Funding System: A Unique Variant of the Norwegian Model-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

The Flemish Performance-based Research Funding System: A Unique Variant of the Norwegian Model

Published:2018-11-01 Issue:4 Volume:3 Page:45-60
ISSN:2543-683X
Container-title:Journal of Data and Information Science
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Engels Tim C. E.¹,Guns Raf

Affiliation:

1. Centre for R&D Monitoring (ECOOM) , Faculty of Social Science , University of Antwerp , Middelheimlaan 1, 2020 Antwerpen , Belgium

Abstract

Abstract 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.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Link

https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/jdis-2018-0020

Reference58 articles.

1. BiGGAR Economics. (2017). The economic contribution of the Flemish Universities. Midlothian. Retrieved from http://www.vlir.be/media/docs/impact/VLIR%20Economic%20Impact%20Report%2011Dec17.pdf

2. Billiet, J., Bocken, H., Bruynseraede, Y., Clarysse, W., De Dijn, H., De Mey, M., … Witte, E. (2004). Bibliometrie in de humane wetenschappen. Brussel: KVAB.

3. Bonaccorsi, A. (2018). Towards an epistemic approach to evaluation in SSH. In A. Bonaccorsi (Ed.), The Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities: Lessons from the Italian Experience (pp. 1–29). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68554-0_1

4. Cornelis, G. (2013). Eerlijke wetenschap. Waarom hebben wetenschapsmensen een geweten nodig? Lannoo Campus.

5. Dahler-Larsen, P. (2017). The new configuration of metrics, rules and guidelines creates a disturbing ambiguity in academia. Retrieved from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2017/07/13/the-new-configuration-of-metrics-rules-and-guidelines-creates-a-disturbing-ambiguity-in-academia/

Cited by 32 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Two circuit assessments of the performance of scientific organizations in Russia: current state and development prospects from the point of view of international experience;Вестник Российской академии наук;2024-07-04

2. Local impact of books: A comparison of libcitations from research‐oriented and public libraries;Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology;2024-06-20

3. Evaluating Literary Studies [FOR 4705] in Australia: Bad Data, Bad Peer Review;Australian Literary Studies;2023-10-30

4. Cognitive and interdisciplinary mobility in the social sciences and humanities: Traces of increased boundary crossing;Journal of Information Science;2023-05-17

5. Disciplinary collaboration rates in the social sciences and humanities: what is the influence of classification type?;Scientometrics;2023-05-15