Search

During the past decade, responsible research assessment (RRA) has become a major science policy goal to advance responsible research and innovation and open science. Starting with the DORA declaration in 2012, common understanding of the needs and demands of RRA has been shaped by a growing number of initiatives, culminating in a European Commission supported Agreement on reforming research assessment published in July 2022. In this paper, we outline and investigate the normative framework for RRA, ranging from binding legal norms (hard law), rules of conduct which, in principle, have no legally binding force but which nevertheless may have practical effects' (soft law) to self-regulation in supranational (the European Union) and one national (Italy) context. As shown by our analysis of hard and soft legal sources for RRA, apart from constitutional and legal provisions regarding freedom of research, autonomy of universities and non-discrimination and gender equality, the legal foundation for RRA rests mainly on soft law and policy norms. In the discussion we relate the normative framework for RRA to research integrity guidelines and consider the challenges of ensuring coherent RRA implementation across countries and research funding and performing institutions. We conclude that self-regulation and soft law are good starting points and may pave the way for hard law down the line: this can be seen as the optimum mix of regulatory mechanisms to mainstream RRAs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper takes a scientometric approach to measure the change in research productivity of Italian academics before the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. We propose a composite output/input bibliometric indicator and apply it at the field level, conducting a longitudinal analysis. Although the number of academics in the national academic system has decreased, we register very strong growth in both the number of publications and their scholarly impact. The growth in productivity, with only rare exceptions, crosses almost all fields. However, in areas that are traditionally very internationalized (Biology, Physics, and Chemistry), growth is less sustained than overall average, and also the variability of productivity across fields seems reduced. The main reason for this detail would be the smaller margins for improvement in the fields that had already reached high international standing. What emerges from the analysis goes counter to some alarms of declining scientific productivity at the global level. The Italian case is partly explained by the historic adoption of policies aimed at strengthening competitive mechanisms, in particular through the introduction of systems of performance-based research funding, and bibliometric accreditation for professorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is that of providing a in-depth analysis of the results of the Italian Research Evaluation Exercise (VQR), specifically looking at possible existing correlations among scientific quality and a number of product- and researcher-specific variables. Ratings are found to crucially depend on language and typology of publication and on themethodology adopted for evaluation; younger researchers and Full Professors are also receiving, ceteris paribus, a better evaluation. Outcomes submitted by researchers working in the Centre-North of the country usually obtain better evaluations than those in the South. Public funding to University research is finally found to be correlated with positive ranking in the assessment exercise, especially in natural sciences and engineering, where there is particular need of appropriate funding for conducing laboratories experiments and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]