The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities

By Frederic S. Lee. 2006

165 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Education, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2d897217ae1ad955c5b2f65aa32cb23d55cb2003

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Education

In Political Science and International Relations

Citations in the corpus

The UK research assessment exercise and the narrowing of UK economics (2013, background): “…top, blue ribbon, or ‘everyone would agree are core, mainstream, highly respected, quality’ journals prior to 1989 and since 1989 up to the present day (Lee, 2006; Schneider and Ursprung, 2008; Ritzberger, 2008; Da Silva 2009; Halkos and Nickolaos, 2011; Kalaitzidakis, Mamuneas, and Stengos,…”
Twenty challenges to innovation studies (2015, methodology): “59 In the UK, this process has been intensified by successive Research Assessment Exercises (Lee, 2007).”
How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management (2012, background): “As noted previously, Lee and Harley have repeatedly argued that bias in the UK research assessment exercise has shifted recruitment in UK economics departments towards mainstream economists and away from heterodox economists (Harley and Lee, 1997; Lee and Harley, 1998; Lee, 2007).”
The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy (2007, background): “There are important exceptions to this judgement (for example, neo-Ricardian economics), but I believe it is shared by most of the recent commentators on traditional heterodoxy (e.g. Backhouse, 2000; Dow, 2000; Lawson, 2006; Lee, 2006).”
Tracking the evolution of waste recycling research using overlay maps of science. (2011, background): “For example, research suggests that British economics departments have narrowed their recruitment to favour ‘main-stream’ economists (Harley and Lee, 1997; Lee and Harley, 1998; Lee, 2007), thus reducing the cognitive diversity of the research system’s ecology.”
‘Nothing includes everything’: towards engaged pluralism in Anglophone economic geography (2010, background): “Either it can side with the heterodox economics that ekes out an existence at the edges of mainstream economics (Lee, 2007) and ‘draw young researchers back into economic geography, as they see the place of a different kind of economic theory in a post-disciplinary social science’ (Amin and Thrift,…”