Research Efficiency in Higher Education: Clustering Higher Education Systems Globally

Abstract

Bu araştırma, boyuttan bağımsız araştırma girdilerini ve çıktılarını karşılaştırarak küresel olarak yükseköğretim sistemlerinin (HES) araştırma verimliliği kümelerini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma, her bir araştırma çıktısının bireysel katkısını keşfetmek için ilişkisel araştırma ve HES'lerin araştırma verimliliği kümelerini tanımlamak için genel anket modeli olmak üzere iki farklı yaklaşımdan yararlanılarak tasarlanmıştır. 75 ülkenin HES'leri dahil olmak üzere, veriler UNESCO İstatistik Enstitüsü, Avrupa Patent Ofisi PATSTAT'ın veritabanından ve her HES'teki "araştırmacı başına oranlar" açısından belirli bir zaman dilimi için Web of Science Core Collection kayıtlarından toplandı; Araştırma ve Geliştirme harcamaları için 2015, makaleler ve patent başvuruları için 2018 ve başlangıçta alınan atıflar için 2018-2019. Bu veri seti üzerinden, öncelikle her bir çıktının (patent başvuruları, makaleler ve atıflar) bireysel katkısına göre HES'lerin araştırma performans puanlarını yeniden hesaplamak için regresyon analizi yapılmış ve bu değişkenler arasındaki çoklu doğrusallık bağlantıları ortadan kaldırılmıştır; ardından ülkeleri HES'lerinin araştırma verimliliği oranları açısından kategorize etmek için kümeleme analizi yapılmıştır. Analiz, dört araştırma verimliliği oranı kümesi göstermiştir: en yüksek grupta yalnızca bir ülke, daha yüksek grupta üç ülke, orta grupta 32 ülke ve daha düşük grupta 39 ülke. Analizde en yüksek araştırma verimliliği oranını gösteren HES'lerden çeşitli politika ve uygulamaları tartışan bu araştırma, küresel araştırma yapısındaki her bir ulusal ve uluslararası faktörün potansiyel katkısıyla araştırma performansını daha da iyileştirmek için öneriler sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Yüksek öğrenim sistemleri
• araştırma girdileri
• araştırma çıktıları
• araştırma verimliliği
• küresel araştırma verimliliği

Research Efficiency in Higher Education: Clustering Higher Education Systems Globally

Abstract

This research aims to identify the research efficiency clusters of higher education systems (HESs) globally by comparing size-independent research inputs and outputs. The research was designed benefitting from two different approaches, correlational research to discover the individual contribution of each research output and the general survey model to define research efficiency clusters of HESs. Including 75 countries’ HESs, the data were collected from the database of the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, PATSTAT of European Patent Office, and the Web of Science Core Collection records for a designated time period in terms of “per researcher rates” in each HES; 2015 for Research & Development spending, 2018 for articles and patent applications, and 2018-2019 for initially received citations. Through this dataset, regression analysis was first performed to re-calculate the research performance scores of HESs by the individual contribution of each output (patent applications, articles, and citations) eliminating the multicollinearity connections among these variables; then, cluster analysis was carried out to categorise countries in terms of the research efficiency ratios of their HES. The analysis showed four clusters of research efficiency ratios: only one country in the highest group, three in the higher group, 32 in the middle group, and 39 in the lower group. Discussing various policies and practices from HESs displaying the top research efficiency ratio in the analysis, this research presents recommendations to further improve research performance by the potential contribution of each national and international factor in the global research structure.

Keywords

• Higher education systems
• research inputs
• research outputs
• research efficiency in higher education
• global clusters of research efficiency

References

1. ACCI. (n.d.) (2021) “American Chamber of Commerce Ireland: Key Facts”, Retrieved from https://www.amcham.ie/about-us/us-ireland-business/stats-facts.aspx.
2. Adelson, J. L., Osborne, J. W. and Crawford, B. F. (2019) “Correlation and Other Measures of Association”, In G. R. Hancock, L. M. Stapleton, and R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences, 2nd ed., 55-71, Routledge.
3. Agasisti, T. and Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2020) “Cross-country Analysis of Higher Education Institutions’ Efficiency: The Role of Strategic Positioning”, Science and Public Policy, Scaa058, 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa058.
4. Ahn, J., Seo, D. and Kwon, Y. (2021) “Impact of Innovation City Projects on National Balanced Development in South Korea: Identifying Regional Network and Centrality”, ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(3): 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10030169.
5. Aldieri, L., Kotsemir, M. and Vinci, C. P. (2018) “The Impact of Research Collaboration on Academic Performance: An Empirical Analysis for Some European Countries”, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 62: 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2017.05.003.
6. Asih, R., Bachtiar, F. and Utami, A. (2025) “Returning PhD Graduates: Maneuvering Research Productivity, Identity, and Institutional Culture”, Higher Education, 1-20. Auranen, O. and Nieminen, M. (2010) “University Research Funding and Publication Performance—An International Comparison”, Research Policy, 39(6): 822. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Respol.2010.03.003. Banu, S. B., Kumar, K. S., Rizvi, M., Rai, S. K. and Rana, P. (2024) “Towards A Framework for Performance Management and Machine Learning in a Higher Education Institution”, Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 4. BCECC. (N.D.) (2021) “Belgian-Chinese Chamber of Commerce: BCECC Patron Members”, Retrieved from Https://Bcecc.Be/. Benito, M., Gil, P. and Romera, R. (2020) “Evaluating the Influence of Country Characteristics on The Higher Education System Rankings’ Progress. Journal of Informetrics, 14(3): 101051, 1. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Joi.2020.101051.
7. Bolli, T. and Somogyi, F. (2011) “Do Competitively Acquired Funds Induce Universities to Increase Productivity?”, Research Policy, 40(1): 136. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Respol.2010.10.001.
8. Bruni, R., Catalano, G., Daraio, C., Gregori, M. and Moed, H. F. (2020) “Studying the Heterogeneity of European Higher Education Institutions”, Scientometrics, 125(2): 1117. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S11192-020-03717-W. Cai, Y. and Etzkowitz, H. (2020) “Theorizing the Triple Helix Model: Past, Present, and Future”, Triple Helix, 7(2-3): 189. Https://Doi.Org/10.1163/21971927-Bja10003.

9. Castro, M. P., Scheede, C. R. and Zermeno, M. G. G. (2019) “The Impact of Higher Education on Entrepreneurship and the Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study in Mexico”, Sustainability, 11(20): 5597. Https://Doi.Org/10.3390/Su11205597. CBTC. (N.D.) (2021) “China Belgium Technology Center”, Retrieved from Https://Www.Cbtc.Eu/En/. Clark, B. R. (1983) “The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspectives”, CA: University of California Press.
10. Coccia, M. and Rolfo, S. (2007) “How Research Policy Changes Can Affect the Organization and Productivity of Public Research Institutes: An Analysis within the Italian National System of Innovation”, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 9(3): 215. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980701494624.
11. Čok, T. (2020) “Slovenia Economy Briefing: Slovenian Science and Technology Innovation Mechanism: How Excellent Is Slovenian Science”, China-CEE Institute Weekly Briefing, 32(2): 1-5.
12. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. and Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012) “Sosyal Bilimler İçin Çok Değişkenli İstatistik: SPSS ve LISREL Uygulamaları [Multivariate Statistics for Social Sciences: SPSS and LISREL Practices]”, 2nd ed., Pegem.
13. DAAD. (n.d.). (2021) “German Academic Exchange Service: Study & Research in Germany”, Retrieved from https://www.daad.de/en/.
14. Dip, J. A. (2021) “What Does U-Multirank Tell Us About Knowledge Transfer and Research?”, Scientometrics, 126(4): 3011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03838-2.
15. Doh, J. P. and Guay, T. R. (2006) “Corporate Social Responsibility, Public Policy, and NGO Activism in Europe and The United States: An Institutional-Stakeholder Perspective”, Journal of Management Studies, 43(1): 47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00582.x. EC (European Commission) (2020) “European Innovation Scoreboard 2020”, Retrieved January 12, 2021, from https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/42981. ERC (2020) “Slovenia – Research Proposal Reading Days”, Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://erc.europa.eu/slovenia.
16. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000) “The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘‘Mode 2’’ to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations”, Research Policy, 29(2): 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
17. Fetters, M., Greene, P. G., Rice, M. P. and Butler, J. S. (Eds.). (2010) “The Development of University‐Based Entrepreneurship Ecosystems: Global Practices”, Edward Elgar.
18. Fukugawa, N. (2008) “Evaluating the Strategy of Local Public Technology Centers in Regional Innovation Systems: Evidence from Japan”, Science and Public Policy, 35(3): 159. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234208X299062.
19. Galvao, A., Mascarenhas, C., Marques, C., Ferreira, J. and Ratten, V. (2019) “Triple Helix and Its Evolution: A Systematic Literature Review”, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 10(3): 812. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-10-2018-0103.
20. GII. (2020) “Global Innovation Index 2020: Who Will Finance Innovation? “, Retrieved June 14, 2021, from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/Home.
21. Glänzel, W., Thijs, B. and Debackere, K. (2014) “The Application of Citation-Based Performance Classes to the Disciplinary and Multidisciplinary Assessment in National Comparison and Institutional Research Assessment”, Scientometrics, 101(2): 939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1247-1.
22. Guan, J. and Wang, J. (2004) “Evaluation and Interpretation of Knowledge Production Efficiency”, Scientometrics, 59(1): 131. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000013303.25298.ae.
23. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. and Anderson, R. E. (2010) “Multivariate Data Analysis”, 7th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall.
24. Kadikilo, A. C., Nayak, P. and Sahay, A. (2024) “Barriers to Research Productivity of Academics in Tanzania Higher Education Institutions: The Need for Policy Interventions”, Cogent Education, 11(1): 2351285.
25. Kavvadia, H., Adam, M. C., Clemons, K., Devenyi, V., Girotto, E., Lisova, Y., Mo, F. and Vojta, Z. (2018) “The Economic Diplomacy of Small States. A Case Study of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg: Trade and Services, Official Development Assistance (ODA)”, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3568999.
26. Ma, J. (2019) “Developing Joint RandD Institutes Between Chinese Universities and International Enterprises in China’s Innovation System: A case at Tsinghua University”, Sustainability, 11(24): 7133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247133.
27. Martín-Gamboa, M. and Iribarren, D. (2021) “Coupled Life Cycle Thinking and Data Envelopment Analysis for Quantitative Sustainability Improvement”, In J. Ren (Ed.), Methods in Sustainability Science: Assessment, Prioritization, Improvement, Design and Optimization, 295-320, Elsevier.
28. McGann, J. G. (2009) “Forging a Partnership between GCC and US Think Tanks”, ECSSR (Abu Dhabi): Emirates Lecture Series, 79, 1.
29. Nakamura, M., Pendlebury, D., Schnell, J. and Szomszor, M. (2019) “Navigating the Structure of Research on Sustainable Development Goals”, Web of Science Group, Retrieved May 17, 2021, from https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/campaigns/sustainable-development-goals/.
30. Naseem, W., Mahmood, H., Rauf, A. and Yen, Y. Y. (2025) “Alleviating Workplace Stress: The Role of Servant Leadership in Preventing Productivity Decline Among Pakistan’s Private Higher Education Institutions”, Cogent Business and Management, 12(1): 2451131.
31. Net4Mobility. (n.d.) (2021) “Slovenia: Country Profile”, Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://www.net4mobilityplus.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Country_profiles_Slovenia.pdf.
32. Nikonova, E. N. and Shavaleyeva, C. M. (2017) ”Realization of the Budgetary Funds Use Efficiency Principle in the Russian Practice of Financing Scientific Research”, Revista QUID, Special Issue (1): 1618.
33. Ori, M. (2013, December 13) “The Rise of Industrial PhDs”, University World News, Retrieved June 14, 2021, from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20131210130327534.
34. Özdemir, E. (2014) “Tarama Yöntemi [Survey Method]”, In M. Metin (Ed.), Kuramdan Uygulamaya Eğitimde Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri [From Theory to Practices, Research Methods in Education], 77-97, Pegem.
35. Palmer, S. and Torgerson, D. (1999) “Economics Notes: Definitions of Efficiency”, British Medical Journal, 318: 1136. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7191.1136.
36. RAE (n.d.). (2021) “Royal Academy of Engineering’s Brochure for Industry-Academia Partnership Programme”, Retrieved June 14, 2021 from https://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/other/iapp-brochure.
37. Reddy, P. A. and Reddy, M. C. R. (2006) ”Universities and NGOs”, Discovery Publishing House.
38. Reuters (2019a) “Reuters Top 100: Europe’s Most Innovative Universities 2019”, Retrieved June 13, 2020 from https://graphics.reuters.com/EUROPE-UNIVERSITY-INNOVATION/010091N02HR/index.html.
39. Reuters (2019b) “Reuters Top 100: The World’s Most Innovative Universities 2019”, Retrieved June 13, 2020 from https://www.reuters.com/innovative-universities-2019.
40. Salvia, A. L., Filho, W. L., Brandli, L. L. and Griebeler, J. S. (2019) “Assessing Research Trends Related to Sustainable Development Goals: Local and Global Issues”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 208: 841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.242.
41. Schmoch, U. and Schubert, T. (2009) “Sustainability of Incentives for Excellent Research — The German Case”, Scientometrics, 81(1): 195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2127-y.
42. Schneijderberg, C. and Götze, N. (2022) “Publishing as Epistemic Governance of Academics: The Cognitive and Social Frontier of University-Industry Linkages and Commercial Indicators”, In C. Sarrico, T. Carvalho, and M Joao (Eds.), Research Handbook on Academic Careers and Managing Academics (pp. 64-87). Elgar.
43. Soh, K. C. (2011) “Don’t Read University Rankings Like Reading Football League Tables: Taking A Close Look at the Indicators”, Higher Education Review, 44(1): 15.
44. Song, M.L., Zhang, L.-L., Liu, W. and Fisher, R. (2013) “Bootstrap-DEA Analysis of BRICS’ Energy Efficiency Based on Small Sample Data”, Applied Energy, (112): 1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.064.
45. Stapleton, L. M. (2019) “Survey Sampling, Administration, and Analysis”, In G. R. Hancock, L. M. Stapleton, and R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences, 2nd Ed., 467-481, Routledge.
46. Study in Sweden. (2021) “Plan Your Studies: Universities”, Retrieved February 15, 2021, from https://studyinsweden.se/universities/.
47. Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (2014) “Using Multivariate Statistics: Pearson New International Edition”, 6th ed., Pearson Education Limited.
48. Tekbıyık, A. (2014) “İlişkisel Tarama Yöntemi [Correlational Survey Model]”, In M. Metin (Ed.), Kuramdan Uygulamaya Eğitimde Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri [From Theory to Practices, Research Methods in Education], pp. 99-114, Pegem.
49. Thanassoulis, E., Kortelainen, M., Johnes, G. and Johnes, J. (2011) “Costs and Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions in England: A DEA Analysis”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62(7): 1282. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2010.68.
50. Torch at UNSW. (n.d.). (2021) “Torch at UNSW: Australia’s Premier Destination for R&D and Innovation”, Retrieved June 14, 2021, from https://www.torch.unsw.edu.au/.
51. Ufuk (2020) (n.d.) “TÜBİTAK EU FP Supports and Awards”, Retrieved June 14, 2021, from https://h2020.org.tr/en/supports-and-awards.
52. UL. (2018) “University of Luxembourg Fourth Four-Year Plan 2018 to 2021”, Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://wwwen.uni.lu/research/focus_areas.
53. UNESCO (n.d.) (2021) “Science, Technology and Innovation: Research and Experimental Development”, Retrieved January 17, 2021, from http://data.uis.unesco.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SCN_DS&lang=en.
54. Uslu, B. (2020) “A Path for Ranking Success: What Does the Expanded Indicator-Set of International University Rankings Suggest?”, Higher Education, 80(5): 949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00527-0.
55. Williams, R. and Leahy, A. (2020) “U21 Ranking of National Higher Education Systems 2020”, Retrieved March 24, 2021, from https://universitas21.com/sites/default/files/2020-04/U21_Rankings%20Report_0320_Final_LR%20Single.pdf.
56. Wilson, R. T. and Baack, D. W. (2012) “Attracting Foreign Direct Investment: Applying Dunning’s Location Advantages Framework to FDI Advertising”, Journal of International Marketing, 20(3): 96. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.11.0023.
57. Yang, X., Cai, X. L. and Li, T. S. (2024) “Does the Tenure Track Influence Academic Research? An Empirical Study of Faculty Members in China”, Studies in Higher Education, 49(3): 476-492.