Open Thread (7/10/2009)

The irony speaks for itself.

The Governance and Performance of Research Universities

Philippe Aghion, Mathias Dewatripont, Caroline M. Hoxby, Andreu Mas-Colell, and André Sapir

"Research productivity is highest for schools in states that allow more autonomy."

ighly productive universities both control their own destinies and face stiff external competition, according to a recent NBER Working Paper.

In The Governance and Performance of Research Universities: Evidence from Europe and the U.S. (NBER Working Paper No. 14851), authors Philippe Aghion, Mathias Dewatripont, Caroline M. Hoxby, Andreu Mas-Colell, and Andr? Sapir construct an index of research productivity that is based on the Shanghai Ranking of World Universities, which includes measures of patents, the number of alumni who have won Nobel Prizes in science, publications appearing in citation indices, or numbers of highly cited researchers. Combining the Shanghai Ranking -- which awards 500 points to the best university -- with the results from a survey of governance policies at 196 European universities, the authors find that "the average Shanghai ranking for a European university that must get its budget approved by the government is just above 200 while the average ranking for a European university that does not need budget approval is 316. In general, each percentage of a university's budget that comes from core government funds reduces its rank by 3.2 points."

European universities required to pay the same amount to all faculty members with the same seniority and rank have an average Shanghai ranking of 213. Universities free to pay faculty as they see fit have an average ranking of 322. Universities free to select undergraduate students as they see fit have a Shanghai ranking 156 points higher than those in which the government determines who will attend. Competition also improves research quality. Each percentage of a university's budget that comes from competitive research grants increases its ranking by 6.5 points.

The NBER researchers find that in Sweden and the United Kingdom universities with high autonomy have high Shanghai ranking scores, while in Spain and the United Kingdom universities with low autonomy have low rankings. The results for state universities in the United States are similar. Research productivity is highest for schools in states that allow more autonomy, such as independent purchasing systems, no state approval of the university budget, and complete control of personnel hiring and pay. States with high rankings and high autonomy include Washington, Colorado, California, Wisconsin, and Michigan. States with low rankings and low autonomy include Arkansas, South Carolina, Kansas, and Louisiana.

Perhaps autonomous universities respond to competition for research funds by developing more productive, inventive, or efficient research programs. The authors seek to show how autonomy and competition affect research productivity by exploiting survey data on the wide variations in those variables among colleges in the U.S. states. Their results confirm that competition increases research productivity. In New Jersey, a highly competitive environment, an increase in exogenous research university expenditure per person increases patenting by residents of that state. In Arkansas, New Mexico, and Maine, where autonomy is low and competition is lackluster, additional spending on research universities may be wasted and may even reduce over-all patenting. Private research universities, which by definition have more autonomy, produce the most patents for any exogenous spending increase. Additional exogenous spending on 2-year colleges generally added little to research productivity during their sample period, and, in some states, may have reduced it.

-- Linda Gorman

http://papers.nber.org/papers/W14851

I think it'd be really easy to tamper with the GPS.  Why not just have a tax on road fuel?  As a plus, heavier vehicles tear the road up more and pay more taxes. 

If you only drive that classic car three times a year, there's no sense in having an expensive GPS tracker or paying a high registration fee just to make gas cheaper. Same with people who have a heavy truck for work and a daily driver that is more economical to operate for long trips. 

Gas taxes work really well, why do we have to change the system?

Pattsi, I think Zeleni was referring to the hypothetical federal program to monitor mileage of private citizens' driving habits, not referring to any mass transit proposal.

The ARMS and LEADS computer databases have been used by law enforcement for years to track motorists for outstanding warrants

God forbid the police departments keep records of their activities.  God forbid the police departments have a list of people who have outstanding warrants.  Yup, sounds just like 1984!?!

Thanks Matt. The more you post, the happier I am you didn't win

matthew peek said:

 My point is that it's not all necessarily publicly available information. What databases do you know of that automatically tell people who you hang out with, where you work, or what tattoos you have (besides sites like facebook or myspace where you willingly surrender your privacy for a little online fun)? Police save information from every single contact with a person.

Traffic stop on a minority without a citation issued?Logged.

Required by state law.

Traffic stop by a state trooper where you get a warning? Logged.

Required by state law.

Stopped with your friends for jaywalking (or walking in a park after dark)? Logged.

Required by state law.

When all this information gets assembled in one place, it's pretty incredible.

Is your knowledge of the written word that bad? or are you yanking my chain?

His knowledge of the written word is really that bad.

mjerry stated--

Matt wrote:  "Traffic stop on a minority without a citation issued?Logged.    Required by state law"

Please reference this.   Must only the stopping of minorities be logged?   A controvery existed  several years ago that Illinois police were stopping minorities  relatively more often by  than non-minorities, which I believe resulted in a law that police log whether each person stopped is a member of a designated minority group

Mjerry--Yes, that's correct.  The originator of the state law requiring the race of stopped drivers to be logged (from the aforementioned "controversy") was none other than Barack Obama.  It was very controversial (and still is).  It is used to give fodder to "community activists" in their efforts to smear/sue police for "racial profiling."

Anon 11:11--

I did say "the state law requiring the race of stopped drivers to be logged."  "White" is considered a race is it not?  I understood what Mjerry's point was.  The information is still used by "community" rabble-rousers to incite "community" scorn, distrust and legal action against the police no matter how you try to spin and euphemize it as a 'benchmark.'

That's true. We have no need for "data" or "scientific method". After all, never in our country's history have there ever been any problems with the discrimination and segregation of people by race, so it's unlikely to ever happen ever again, and therefore it would be an atrocity to simply collect data.

Science is so scary. It's just like those awful minorities to push science over the purity of opinion that is held by the white race.