HOW CONCENTRATED IS THE UK
RESEARCH BASE?
THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXCELLENCE AND DIVERSITY
JONATHAN ADAMS
14 OCTOBER 2009
Previously among studies by Evidence
• HEFCs/UUK – Maintaining Research Excellence
– Recognition of a peak supported by a research platform
– Evolution of 3 to 4 to 5 grade units
• HEFCE – Role of QR funding
– Strategic significance of the block grant
• Universities UK – Excellence and Diversity
– Regional network of research competence
– Importance of an evidence base for research policy
• OST/DIUS/BIS
– Diversity as a critical element in research policy
RAE2008 –
a novel outcome with dispersed rewards
• Gareth Roberts’ proposals on research profiling
– Problem of the ‘cliff edge’
– Recognising dynamic excellence in the research base
• Unexpected differences between panels
– The problem of interpreting methodology and standards
– The absence of a commonly understood standard?
– The dispersed map of reward-able research
• Decisions about funding allocations
– 2* = 1 (x 3 to) 3* = 3 (x 2.33 to) 4* = 7
– Greater relative rewards for modest gains than for very
expensive world-class excellence (cf 2001)
How can we explore the spread of excellence?
• We have
– Panel outcomes from RAE2008 – but opinions differ, so ...
– Bibliometric data on a consistent basis from 1981
• We split the HE sector into crude groups
– All HEIs
– Russell Group
– 1994 Group
– Universities with a shorter history of research investment
• And we created an elite ‘golden triangle’ band
– Oxford (C12th), Cambridge (1209), UCL (1836), Imperial
(C19th) , LSE (1895)
Excellence is linked to selectivity
25
Papers co-authored by
five leading institutions
1.3
20
5 year moving
average
UK citation impact
1.2
1.1
15
1981
1986
1989
1991 1992
1996
2001
2006
Share (%) of UK research output co-authored by golden triangle
Relative impact of UK research publications
1.4
And excellence is concentrated
UK output
Papers with at least
one co-author from
the HE research base
Papers with at least
one co-author from
the Russell Group
Total articles and
reviews, 2002-2006
Papers above world
average impact
Papers with
impact exceeding
four times world
average
112,358
16,060
37% of HE total
5.2% of HE total
306,661
204,307
79,505
66% of UK HEIs’
total
70% of HE output
Papers with at least
87,157
one co-author from a
28% of HEIs’ total
’golden triangle’ HEI
11,734
73% of HE output
39% of Russell total
5.7% of Russell
total
37,370
6,308
33% of HE output
39% of HE output
43% of GT total
7.2% of GT total
The problem with simplistic indicators
• They don’t really express the complexity of
research performance
• Average impact (e.g. ‘crown indicator’) can be very
misleading
– Research Council studies reveal error of interpretation
– Skewed data, median much smaller than average
– Lots of papers are not cited
– The interesting bit is about how much is really, really cited
lots
• So we we prefer Impact Profiles®
UK background and ‘golden triangle’
UK higher education sector, all research fields - 306661 papers
UK 'golden triangle', all research fields - 87157 papers
25
This is the small but critical
excess of really highly cited
research output
Percentage of output 2002 - 2006
20
15
10
5
0
uncited
RBI > 0 < 0.125 RBI ≥ 0.125 < RBI ≥ 0.25 < 0.5 RBI ≥ 0.5 < 1
0.25
RBI ≥ 1 < 2
RBI ≥ 2 < 4
RBI ≥ 4 < 8
RBI ≥ 8
Even smaller differences separate the UK and
USA research profiles
30
UK 10 Years - 686476 Papers
USA 10 Years - 2888315 Papers
Percentage of output 1996-2005
25
20
15
10
5
0
RBI = 0
RBI > 0 - 0.125
RBI 0.125 - 0.25
RBI 0.25 - 0.5
RBI 0.5 - 1
RBI 1 - 2
RBI 2 - 4
RBI 4 - 8
RBI > 8
Excellence extends to other institutions
UK higher education sector, all research fields - 306661 papers
Russell Group, all research fields - 204307 papers
UK 'golden triangle', all research fields - 87157 papers
Percentage of output 2002 - 2006
20
15
10
5
0
uncited
RBI > 0 < 0.125 RBI ≥ 0.125 < RBI ≥ 0.25 < 0.5 RBI ≥ 0.5 < 1
0.25
RBI ≥ 1 < 2
RBI ≥ 2 < 4
RBI ≥ 4 < 8
RBI ≥ 8
But the differences become very fine
UK higher education sector, all research fields - 306661 papers
Russell Group, all research fields - 204307 papers
1994 Group, all research fields - 58083 papers
Percentage of output 2002 - 2006
20
15
10
5
0
uncited
RBI > 0 < 0.125 RBI ≥ 0.125 < RBI ≥ 0.25 < 0.5 RBI ≥ 0.5 < 1
0.25
RBI ≥ 1 < 2
RBI ≥ 2 < 4
RBI ≥ 4 < 8
RBI ≥ 8
And if we distil further, other complexity is
revealed
Russell-5, all research fields - 126885 papers
1994 Group, all research fields - 58083 papers
UK 'golden triangle', all research fields - 87157 papers
Percentage of output 2002 - 2006
20
15
10
5
0
uncited
RBI > 0 < 0.125 RBI ≥ 0.125 < RBI ≥ 0.25 < 0.5 RBI ≥ 0.5 < 1
0.25
RBI ≥ 1 < 2
RBI ≥ 2 < 4
RBI ≥ 4 < 8
RBI ≥ 8
Older institutions have no monopoly on
quality, but the peak is distinctive
UK higher education sector - 306661 papers
1994 Group, all research fields - 58083 papers
Russell-5, all research fields - 126885 papers
UK 'golden triangle', all research fields - 87157 papers
Percentage of output 2002-2006
6
For the 1994 Group, there
are relatively fewer low-cited
papers and relatively more
high-cited papers than for
many in the Russell Group
4
2
0
uncited
RBI > 0 < 0.125 RBI ≥ 0.125 < 0.25 RBI ≥ 0.25 < 0.5
RBI ≥ 0.5 < 1
RBI ≥ 1 < 2
RBI ≥ 2 < 4
RBI ≥ 4 < 8
RBI ≥ 8
What does this imply?
• There is a very concentrated peak of exceptional
excellence
• UK international competitiveness is associated with
selectivity that increased concentration
• There is a regional network of exceptional quality,
much in dynamic institutions created in the 1960s
• The balance that supports diversity & dynamism
and the concentrated support of international
excellence is very fine
• Model first, meddle second