No abstract

Research quality is the cornerstone of modern science, it is used in the understanding of reputational differences among scientific and academic institutions. Traditionally, scientific activity is measured by a set of indicators and well-established bibliometric techniques based on the number of academic papers published in top-ranked journals or on the number of citations of these papers. These indicators are usually critical in measuring differences in research performance, both at individual and at scientific institutional levels. In this paper, we introduce an alternative and complementary set of indicators based on the results of competition for research funding, that aims to enlarge the framework in which research performance has traditionally been measured. Theoretical support for this paper is found in the role that the search for funding plays in the researchers' credibility cycle as well as in peer review, the basic instrument for the allocation of public R&D funds. Our method analyses the outcomes of the researchers' struggle for funding, using data from research proposal applications and awards, as the unit of observation, and aggregating them by research institutions to rank them in relative scales of research competitiveness.

The economic crisis which began in 2008 has had a far-reaching impact, including effects on the innovation behaviour of firms. Many companies have reduced their innovation-related activities, although some firms have been more resilient than others. Using a representative microdata panel of Spanish firms, we study the probability of companies abandoning in-house R&D during the crisis and its relationship to regional and policy factors. We find significant regional heterogeneity related to regional economic size and the type of the regional innovation system; regional government R&D support only reduces R&D abandonment rates in regions where a strong system of knowledge exploitation is in place.

No abstract