ResearchFundingofAustralianUniversities:

AreThereIncreasingConcentration?

ThiMaiAnhNguyena,AliciaRambaldi

a,KamKiTang

a

a.UniversityofQueensland,Australia

Abstract

Australia’shighereducationsectorisfacingawatershedmomentofitsresearchfundingregime.

TheFederalGovernmenthasproposedtochangefromthelong-standingfundingmodelthat

heavilybasedonpublicationoutput,toonebasedonpublicationplusindustryengagement.Inthis

paper,wetakestockofhowresearchfundingisraisedandallocatedwithinthesectoroverthepast

twodecades.Itisfoundthattheshareoftotalresearchfundingbyuniversitygroupshavebarely

changed.ButthedisciplineofBiologicalandClinicalScienceshasincreasinglydominated

competitivefundingschemes.

Keywords:Researchfunding,ARC,NHMRC

1 Introduction

Australia’shighereducationsectorisfacingunprecedentedchallengesfrombothdomesticand

internationalfronts.Inthepast20years,thesectorhasexperiencedcutsinfederalfundingona

perstudentbasis(Marginson2001),atrendthatputspressureonAustralianuniversitiesto

increasinglyrelyonstudentfees.Australianuniversitiesareincreasinglylookingtooverseas

educationmarketsasasourceoffunding.However,competitionforinternationalstudentshas

intensifiedrapidlywiththeentryofnon-EnglishspeakingcountriesfromEurope(e.g.France)and

Asia(e.g.China)inadditionaltoEnglishspeakingcountriesliketheUSandSingapore.Whataddsto

thisalreadycomplexenvironmentisthespectacularriseofglobaluniversityrankingsinthepast

decade.Theserankingsaredeemeda‘consumerguide’byinternationalstudentsorevenpublic

organizations(Hazelkorn2007;HEFCE2008),andtheytypicallyputoverwhelmingweightson

research,especiallyTheAcademicRankingofWorldUniversities(commonlyunknownasShanghai

JiaoTongUniversityranking).Consequently,theyhaveputhugepressureonuniversitiesworldwide

tolifttheirgameonresearch.

ThetotalresearchfundingallocatedtoAustralianuniversitieswasaboutone-thirdofapercentage

pointofGDPin2013(seeTable2).AstheFederalGovernmentfacesthechallengesofbudget

repair,thefundingpieisunlikelytogetbigger–ifnotsmaller–intheforeseeablefuture.

Therefore,howthepieisdistributedbecomesevenmorecriticalforthefutureresearch

performanceofindividualuniversities.Inrelationtothat,certainsegmentofthetertiarysectorhas

arguedthatduetotherelativelysmallsizeofAustraliainglobalresearch,thewaytoensure

Australiacanpunchaboveitsweightistochannelscarcefundingtothenation’s‘bestperformers’

sothattheycanachievethecriticalmasstobegloballycompetitive(Dodd,2015).Notsurprisingly,

sandstoneuniversitiesaremoresupportiveofthisviewwhilesmallerandregionaluniversities

2

disagree.However,littleevidencehasbeenproducedtovalidateorinvalidatethecriticalmass

argumentintheAustraliancontext.1

Furthermore,theFederalGovernmentrecentlyannouncedchangestothefundingmodelof

Australianuniversitieswhichwillseelessemphasisonpublicationandanincreasedweightof

industrialengagement:‘thenewarrangementsaredesignedtodrivegreaterresearch-industry

engagementbysubstantiallyboostingincentivesforcollaborationwithbusinessandorganisations

whichusetheoutcomesofresearch’(DepartmentofEducationandTraining,2016).Againstthis

background,andconsideringthetwodecadesfrom1992to2013,theobjectiveofthispaperisto

investigate:

(a) howmuchresearchfundingthepublicandprivatesectorshavecontributedtothe

Australianhighereducationsectorandhowdiditchangeovertime;

(b) howfundinghasbeendistributedamongstuniversitiesandwhetherthereisincreasingor

decreasingfundingconcentrationovertime;and

(c) howthecompetitivefundingfromthetwomajorgrantbodies,theAustralianResearch

Council(ARC)andNationalHealthandMedicalResearchCouncil(NHMRC),hasbeen

distributedamongstdisciplinesandwhetherthereisincreasingordecreasingfunding

concentrationovertime.

Tothebestofourknowledge,thesequestionshavenotbeenansweredbeforeusingthedatain

recentdecades.Akeycontributionofthispaperisthecompilationofapaneldataofresearch

fundingovertwodecadesforallAustralianuniversities.Wecollectedandprocesseddatafromthe

HigherEducationResearchDataCollection(HERDC),ARCandNHMRCdatabases.Acontributionof

thepaperistoreconciletheFOR2008andRFCD1998codesforresearchdisciplines(seeappendix

fordetails),withwhichwecalculatetheamountofARCorNHMRCresearchfundingattributedto

eachdisciplinewithineachuniversityeachyear.MostanalysesontheallocationofARCand

NHMRCfundingoverdisciplinesamalgamategrantsbycommencementyear.Weinsteadlookat

annualallocationsandupdateexpectedallocationswithactualoneswheneverpossible.Thedata

collectionworkischallengingbecauseofthemultiplicityofdatasourcesandchangingdata

collectionmethodsbygovernmentagenciesovertime.Wewentthroughthefundedprojectsone

byonetocorrectanydouble-ormis-reporting.

StudiesonresearchfundingallocationamongstAustralianuniversitiesarefewandfarinbetween.

AbbottandDoucouliagos(2003)studytechnicalandscaleefficiencyofAustralianuniversitiesusing

DataEnvelopmentAnalysis(DEA).Theirstudyusesthenumberofequivalentfull-timestudents

(EFTS),thenumberofpostgradstudentsandundergraduatedegrees,andResearchQuantum

Allocationasmeasuresofoutput,whileinputmeasuresincludethenumberofstaff(academicand

non-academic),expenditureonallinputsotherthanlabourinputs,andthevalueofnon-current

assetsasaproxyforcapitalstock.TheyfindthatAustralia’suniversitiesperformfairlyevenly

regardingefficiency.However,thestudysuffersfromthesameproblemfacedbyotherstudiesin

theliterature(includingthecurrentpaper),whichisitsinabilitytocaptureoutputquality.Our

1ArecentstudybyWilliams(2016)assessesAustralia’sinvestmentinR&Dactivities,researchoutputandconnectivity

withindustryfromaninternationalperspective.Itconcludesthatthecountryisbiasedtowardsbasicresearch,afact

thatisdrivenbyitsrelianceoninternationalstudents’tuition,whichinturnimpliesitsrelianceoninternational

rankings.Thestudysuggestsadiversesystem,inwhichagroupofinstitutionspursuesexcellenceofinternational

standardsinbasicresearch,andothersfocusmoreonappliedstudiesinvolvinglocalissues.

3

studydoesnotassessuniversityproductivity.Instead,wefocusondistributionalmovementsof

totalresearchfundingovertime.

Anotherstudy,Villeetal.(2006),focusesonthedistributionalmovementsofmajorinputand

outputmeasurescompiledbyHERDCusingcalculatedGinicoefficients.However,theirstudycovers

theperiodfrom1992to2003,excludingblockgrantsanddetailedbreakdownsofCommonwealth

competitiveincomeintoARC,NHMRC,andotherschemesaswellastheirdisciplinecomponents.

TheirstudypointstoagradualconvergencepatterninoutputbyGo8andsmalleruniversities,but

continuingunevendistributioninfundingbetweenthetwogroupsfrom1992to2003.Ouranalysis

from2001to2013revealssimilarpatterns.

Therestofthepaperisorganizedasfollows.Section2describesthedatausedintheanalysis.

Section3presentsadescriptivesummaryofthedistributionoffundingbysources.Section4

examinestheallocationoffundingacrossuniversitygroups,withineachofthesegroupsandfinally

acrossalluniversities.Thepaperconcludeswithabriefdiscussionontheimplicationsofourstudy

andasummaryofitskeyfindings.

2 Data

Sinceallthefundingdatausedinthispaperareaboutresearchingfunding,inwhatfollowsweuse

theterm‘funding’forbrevity.Wecompilethedatafromfourmainsources:theHigherEducation

ResearchDataCollection(HERDC)fromtheDepartmentofEducationandTraining(DET),the

NationalCompetitiveGrantsProgramDataset(NCGP),theResearchManagementDatabaseofthe

NationalHealthandMedicalResearchCouncil(NHMRC),andtheDET’sdocumentonResearch

BlockGrant(RBG)allocations.Detailsofthesedatasetsareprovidedintheappendix.

Figure1providesaschematicpresentationofthecompositionofresearchfundingforAustralian

universities.Thetotalresearchfundingmakesupofthreemaincomponents:CompetitiveIncome,

RBG,andOtherIncome.TwomainsubcomponentsofCompetitiveIncomeareAustraliaResearch

Council(ARC)grantsandNHMRCgrants.OurrecordofARCgrantsonlyincludesthosecommencing

noearlierthan2002,andNHMRCgrantsincludethosecommencingnoearlierthan1990.This

meansthatanalysesofannualfundingflowsinlevelswilldownwardlybiasfundingamountsin

earlyyearsoftheperiod,andinadditioninflationaryeffectswouldneedtobeaccountedfor.To

reducetheformerbiasandcastsasidethelatterissueweusesharesoffunding.

Thedatasetcovers39universitiesoutof41universitieslistedasHEPsundertheHigherEducation

SupportAct2003.2FiguresforUniversityofNotreDameAustraliaareonlyavailableforyearssince

2008.Thishasnegligibleeffectontheanalysesoffundingallocationbyuniversitygroupbecause

thisuniversity’sshareintotalresearchfundingisverysmall.Tomaketheanalyticalresultseasierto

comprehend,wegroupsimilaruniversitiestogetherasaunit.Sinceuniversitiesareheterogeneous

inmanyaspects,thereisnosinglewaytogroupthem.Therefore,weadoptthegroupingchosenby

universitiesthem.AnumberofAustralianuniversitieswithsimilarityinsize,historyandorientation

haveformedtheirowngroupsandusethemasplatformtopursueissuesoftheirinterests.They

includetheAustralianTechnologyNetwork(ATN),theGroupofEight(Go8),andtheInnovation

2TheBachelorInstituteofIndigenousTertiaryEducationandMCDUniversityofDivinityareexcludedbecauseof

inconsistentrecordbyHERDC.AustralianMaritimeCollege,whichwasmergedtotheUniversityofTasmaniain2008is

alsoexcluded.

4

ResearchUniversities(IRU).3TheircompositionisshowninTable1.Wegrouptherestasthe

‘Other’.Go8universitiesareknownasthe‘sandstone’universities,astheytendtobetheoldest

andlargest.Theyarealsomoreresearchorientedingeneraland,asaresult,tendtodominate

researchfundingallocation.

3 DistributionofFundingbySource

Inthissection,welookatthedistributionoffundingbysource;inthenextsection,welookatthe

distributionbyuniversity.

Figure1showstheamountandshareoffundingreceivedbyAustralianuniversitiesbysourcesasin

2013.Itcanbeseenfromthemiddlelayerofthechartthat,CompetitiveIncome,RGB,andOther

Sourcesareofroughlycomparablemagnitudes.Asshowninthebottomlayerofthechartthat,

ARCandNMHRCgrantstogethermakeupthebulkofthecompetitivegrants:46%and37%

respectively.WithintheOtherSourcescategory,OtherPublicIncomeandIndustryandOther

Income(e.g.contracts,donations,bequests)makeup44%and48%respectively.

Figure2showstheshareoffundingreceivedbydifferentuniversitygroupsin2013.ATN’sfunding

sourcesaremostdiverse,whileGo8’sareleastdiverse.Groupswithlessdiversefundingsources

arepotentiallymorevulnerabletochangesinindividualgrantcategories.HalfofGo8’sresearch

fundingisfromARC,NHMRCorsimilarcompetitivesources,whileonlyathirdofATN’sfundingis

fromthesesources.Moreover,althoughCRCremainsasmallportionoftotalfunding,itssharein

ATN’stotalfundingismuchhighercomparedtothoseoftheothergroups,probablyreflectingthe

former’sfocusonappliedresearch.

Figure3showstheallocationofeachfundingbyuniversitygroupin2013.AlthoughGo8dominates

everyfundingcategoryatthebottomlevelofthechart,itsshareisparticularlylargefortheARC

andNHMRCones.ATNperformsbestintheCRCcategory,andIRUdoeswellintheOtherACGR

Schemescategory;butthesetwocategoriesarerelativelysmallinabsolutedollarterms.

4 AllocationofFundingbyUniversity

Thelastsectionpresentsthefundingallocationofasingleyear;inthissection,welookathowthe

allocationchangesovertime.Thefocusisonwhetherthereisanysignofresourceconcentration

acrossaswellaswithinuniversitygroups.

Table2expandsthedataofFigure1backto1992,andexpressesitasashareofnominalGDP.For

somecategories,dataarenotavailableinearlieryears.Therefore,weonlydothesumifdataforall

componentsofthedataareavailabletoavoidinconsistentandpotentiallymisleadingresults.This

isthereasonTotalFundingfiguresarenotreportedtill2001,forinstance.

Overtheyears,fundinggrewinsomecategoriesanddeclinedinothers.From2004to2013,

CompetitiveIncomeandOtherSourceincreasedby32%and24%respectively,whileRBG

decreasedby13%(allintermsofshareofGDP,notabsolutedollars).Themaindriveroffunding

3Thegroupmembershipinformationisdrawnfromeachofthefirstthreegroups,withtheremainingonebeing

groupedtogetheras“Others”:https://go8.edu.au/page/member-information,https://www.atn.edu.au/about-us/our-

universities/,andhttp://www.iru.edu.au/about/history/.

5

growthfromOtherSourcesisthegrowthinOtherPublicIncome(63%).Incontrast,CRCfunding

decreasedby47.24%.WithinCompetitiveIncome,ARCfundinggrewmuchlessrapidlycompared

toNHMRCfunding,withincreasesof23%and47%respectivelyovertheten-yearperiod.

4.1 AllocationofFundingacrossUniversityGroups

Figure4showstheshareofthetotalfundingbyuniversitygroupsfrom2001to2013.Duringthis

period,theshareofGo8increasedslightlyby2.5percentagepointsfrom64.6%to67.1%,andthat

ofATNincreasedby0.9percentagepointfrom8.5%to9.4%.Onthecontrary,theshareofIRU

declinedby1.9percentagepointsfrom12.5%to10.6%,andthatofOthersalsodeclinedby1.5

percentagepointsfrom14.4%to12.9%.

Abreakdownofthefundingbysub-categoryshowsthattheincreaseinthetotalfundingshareby

Go8duringthisperiodcamelargelyfromitsrisingsharesofCompetitiveIncome(from70.8%to

73.0%)andRGB(from61.8%to64.5%);itsshareofOtherSourcesincreasedonlymarginallyin

comparison(from64.0%to64.1%).ForATN,itsexpansionspreadquiteequallyacrossthethree

sources:from4.8%to6.6%forCompetitiveIncome,from8.9%to9.8%forRGB,andfrom10.5%to

11.5%forOtherSources.

Amongstalltypesofresearchincome,thecompetitionforARCandNHMRCfundingtendtoattract

mostattentionwithinthesection.Thisisbecausetheymakeupthebulkofcompetitivefunding,

whichfurtherfeedsintothecalculationofRBGallocation,andsohavingtheeffectofdouble-

dipping.Furthermore,becauseoftheirassessmentmethodsheavilyrelyonpeerreview,ARCand

NHMRCareperceivedtobeamuchstrongerindicatorofresearchexcellenceintheconventional

sensethanothertypesoffunding.Therefore,welookatthesharesofthesetwosourcesoffunding

inmoredetails.

Figure5showstheshareofARCfundingbyuniversitygroupover2002-2013.TheshareofGo8in

ARCgrantshasasignificantgainof7.7percentagepoints–from65.2%to72.9%.Asaresult,all

otherthreegroupssufferedalossoffundingshare.However,thedropofIRUwasparticularbigof

4.4percentagepoints–from12.8%to8.4%.ThedeclineinfundingsharesbyATNandOtherswere

1percentagepoint(from7.7%to6.7%)and2.2percentagepoints(from14.3%to12.1%)

respectively.

DataforNHMRCgrantsisavailableforamuchlongerperiod,from1992to2013,andtheresults

areshowninFigure6.Interesting,unlikeARCfunding,theshareofGo8inNHMRCfundingwas

essentiallystaticataround83.5%.ThisfindingisevenmorestrikinggivenANUwasnotallowedto

participateinNHMRC(orARC)grantcompetitionpriortoyear2000.Overthesetwodecades,the

biggestgainwasexperiencedbyATN:anoverthreepercentagepointsincreaseinfundingshare

from0.9%to4.2%.Others’sharewasmorethandoublefrom2.3%to5.1%.Onthecontrary,IRU

sufferedabigloss;itssharewasalmosthalvedfrom13.3%to7.1%.

4.2 AllocationofFundingwithinUniversityGroups

Inthissub-section,weexaminetheallocationoffundingwithineachuniversitygroup.Tothatend,

wecalculatethecoefficientofvariationoffundingwithineachgroup.Coefficientofvariation(CV)is

equaltothestandarddeviationdividedbythemean,andacommonlyusedmeasureofdispersion.

AlargerCVmeansthatfundingisdistributedlessequallywithinthegroup.Becausethemeasureis

normalizedbythemean,wecancomparethevaluesacrossgroups.

6

Figure7showstheCVofTotalFundingbyuniversitygroupover2001-2013.TotalFundingwithin

ATN,Go8andIRUismuchlessdispersecomparedtothatwithintheOther,whichhadconsistent

CVfiguresofaround0.9-1.0throughouttheperiod.ThisreflectsthefactthattheOtherisless

homogeneousthanthethreemajorgroups.Amongthethreemajorgroups,thereappearstobea

slightpatternofconvergenceinfundingdispersion.WhiletheCVofATNincreasedfrom0.13in

2001to0.27in2013,thatofGo8decreasedfrom0.33to0.27,andthatofIRUdecreasedfrom0.40

to0.25overthesameperiod.ComparedtothefiguresforARCandNHMRCfundinginthefollowing

discussion,thesefiguresandvariationsarehowevernegligible.

Again,welookatARCandNHMRCfundingmoreclosely.Figure8showstheCVofARCfundingby

universitygroupfrom2002to2013.ByandlargetherearelittlechangesofCVovertime.If

anything,theCVofGo8reducedfrom0.34to0.28overtheperiod.Likewise,Figure9showstheCV

forNHMRCfundingbyuniversitygroupover2002-2013.ComparingtoARCfunding,therearelot

moredynamicsintheNHMRCfundingallocationwithineachgroup.TheCVofOthersreducesfrom

1.93to1.39overtheperiod,andthatofIRUfrom1.40to0.88,meaninganincreaseinequalityof

fundingdistributionwithineachofthesetwogroups.Thedistributionoffundingbecomesless

equalwithinATN,withitsCVincreasedfrom0.85to1.02.Thesestrongwithingroupinequality

dynamicscouldbeduetothefactthatGo8universitieshadalionshareofNHMRCfunding(see

Figure4),andsoanoccasionalsuccessbynon-Go8universitiesintheNHMRCschemecouldtrigger

inabigchangeindistributionwithinGo8.WedonotobservethesamesituationinARCevenwhen

Go8alsodominatesthere(buttoalessextent).ThisisprobablybecauseARCcoversamuch

broaderspectrumofdisciplinesthanNHMRCandsoitiseasierforauniversitytosmoothoutthe

fundingincomesacrossallitsdisciplinesunderARC.

Last,Figure10showstheCVoffundingacrossalluniversities,notjustwithinuniversitygroups.The

variationofTotalFundingacrossalluniversitiesincreasedoverthesampleperiod,astherising

variationinCompetitiveIncomeandRGBoverwhelmedthedeclinevariationinOtherSources.

5 AllocationofARCandNHMRCFundingbyDiscipline

Inthissection,weshiftthefocusfromuniversitygroupstodisciplines,whichhasneverbeen

investigatedbefore.TheanalysisislimitedtoARCandNHMRConlyduetotheavailabilityofdata

Figure11showsthatbetween2002and2013thereappearedtobeashiftinARCfundingfrom

naturalsciences,includingPhysical,ChemicalandEarthScience(PCE),Engineeringand

EnvironmentalScience(EE)andBiologicalandBiotechnologicalSciences(BB),towardsother

disciplines.TheshareofPCEexhibitsmostvariation,decliningsignificantlyfrom29%to19%over

thefirsteightyearsbeforetherecentrecoveryto22%.Furthermore,EEandBBeachhaslostabout

threepercentagepointsintheshareofARCfunding.Incontrast,asteadyincreaseofsimilar

magnitudeinsharesofARCfundingwasenjoyedbyHumanitiesandCreativeArts(HCA),Social,

BehaviouralandEconomicsSciences(SBE)andBiomedicalandClinicalHealthSciences(BCH).

However,thebulkoffundingforBCHandPublicandAlliedHealthSciences(PAHS)comesfrom

NHMRCinsteadofARC.Inordertogainamorecomprehensivepictureweneedtoconsiderboth

fundingsources.

7

Figure12showsthevariationineachdiscipline’sshareinthecombinedpieofARCandNHMRC

funding.William(2016)findsthatAustralia’shighereducationsectormaintainsrelativelyweak

connectivitywiththeindustry,incomparisontocountrieswithgoodresearchpoliciesorhighlevel

oftechnologicaladvances.Thestudypointsoutthatengineeringandtechnologytakeupa

relativelysmallshareofresearchexpenditure5byAustralianhighereducationinstitutions.Thisisin

starkcontrastwithexpenditureonmedicalresearch,whereAustraliaonlycomessecondafter

Sweden.ThesituationmanifestsitselfinFigure12.Sharesoffundingonmedicalresearchare

predominantandrisingfast.TheshareoffundingbyBCHincreasedsignificantlyfrom26%to30%,

leavingagapof15percentagepointsby2013tothenextpredominantdiscipline-BB.Asimilarrise

canbeseeninPAHS,with8%and11%in2002and2013respectively.Sharesoffundingon

engineeringandtechnologydecreasedsteadilyovertheperiod.However,futurechangestothe

fundingschemewithemphasisesoninnovationandapplicationofresearchmaybreakthispattern.

6 Conclusion

Inthispaper,wehavecompiledthedataofresearchfundingforAustralianuniversitiesbetween

2001and2013.Althoughtheunderlyingdataarepubliclyavailable,differentsourcesarenot

necessaryconsistentand,insomecases,evendatafromthesamesourceareinconsistentover

time.Therefore,thecompilationofthisdatasetisinitselfacontributiontothedisciplineasthe

datasetshouldproveusefulforfutureresearchinthisarea.

Inthispaper,wehaveprovidedacomprehensivethoughbasicanalysisofthedata.Wehave

examinedthedistributionoffundingbysources,universitygroupsanddisciplinesovertime.One

strikingresultisthat,over13years,thesharesoftotalresearchfundingbythefouruniversity

groupshavebarelychanged,thoughthechangesofindividualfundingcategoriessuchas

competitivegrantandindustryfundingareslightlybigger.Changesinfundingdistributionwithin

eachofthefouruniversitygroupsovertimearealsolimited,withtheexceptionofNHMRCfunding.

Ouranalysisrevealedthat,atleastforARCandNHMRCfunding,thedynamicsliedwithdisciplines,

notuniversities.BiologicalandClinicalScienceshasincreasinglydominatedthetwocompetitive

grantschemes,absorbingupto30%ofthefundingin2013,whilethesetwoschemestogether

accountedformorethanaquarter(26.4%)ofthetotalresearchfundingtouniversitiesintheyear.

Amongstthefouruniversitygroups,Go8relyparticularlyheavilyoncompetitivegrants.Thisisnot

surprisinggiventhesetypesofgrantsrequireinvestigatorswithtrackrecordsbasedonquality

basedtraditionalresearchoutputsuchaspublicationsratherthan,say,socialimpacts.Assuch,Go8

universitiescouldbemorevulnerablethantheircounterpartstochangesincompetitivegrant

allocationcriteriaawayfrompublicationsinhighrankedjournals.

7 References

5TheremarkisbasedondatafromtheUNESCOScience,TechnologyandInnovationdatabaseat

<http://data.uis.unesco.org>.Thedatarefertoyear2011-2013.

8

Abbott,M.&Doucouliagos,C.(2003).TheefficiencyofAustralianuniversities:adataenvelopment

analysis.EconomicsofEducationReview,22(1):89-97.

DepartmentofEducationandTraining(2016).Newarrangementforresearchblockgrantsin2017.

PressRelease,21October.URL:https://education.gov.au/news/new-arrangements-research-block-

grants-2017.

Dodd,T.(2015).FundthebestPhDsandforgettherest,sayeliteunis.AustralianFinancialReview,

5September.URL:http://www.afr.com/news/policy/education/fund-phds-at-the-best-unis-and-

forget-the-rest-say-elite-universities-20150901-gjcozi

Gowthorp,L.(2016).WinningEdgefailstodeliver,sowhatnowforAustralia’sOlympichopes?The

Conversation.URL:https://theconversation.com/winning-edge-fails-to-deliver-so-what-now-for-

australias-olympic-hopes-64051.

Hazelkorn,E.(2008).Learningtolivewithleaguetablesandranking:Theexperienceofinstitutional

leaders.HigherEducationPolicy,21(2):193–215.

HigherEducationFundingCouncilforEngland(HEFCE)(2008).Countingwhatismeasuredor

measuringwhatcounts?Leaguetablesandtheirimpactonhighereducationinstitutionsin

England.London:HEFCE.

Marginson,S.(2001).TrendsinthefundingofAustralianhighereducation.TheAustralianEconomic

Review,34(2):205-215.

Norton,A.(2016).MappingAustralianhighereducation2016.GrattanInstitute.Melbourne.URL:

http://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/875-Mapping-Australian-Higher-Education-

2016.pdf.

Ville,S.Valadkhani,A.&O’Brien,M.(2006).Thedistributionofresearchperformanceacross

Australianuniversities,1992-2003,anditsimplicationsforbuildingdiversity.AustralianEconomic

Papers,45(4):343-361.

Williams,R.(2016).EvaluatingthecontributionofhighereducationtoAustralia’sresearch

performance.TheAustralianEconomicReview,49(2):174-83.

9

Appendix

TheHERDCdataset–providesdataonCompetitiveIncome,OtherPublicIncome,Industryand

OtherIncome,CooperativeResearchCentre(CRC)Income.CompetitiveIncomeconsistsofincome

fromresearchschemesandprogramsregisteredontheannualAustralianCompetitiveGrants

Register(ACGR).OtherPublicIncomeincludesincomefromtheAustralianGovernmentnoteligible

forinclusioninCompetitiveIncome;incomefromStateorTerritoryGovernment;incomefromlocal

government;incomefromgovernmentbusinessenterprisesthatarepubliclyownedorfunded,

eitherwhollyorpartly;CRCsIncomewherethereportinghighereducationprovider(HEP)isnot

specifiedaseither‘TheResearcher’or‘Participant’intheCommonwealthAgreement.Industryand

OtherResearchIncomeincludescontracts,grants,donations,bequestsandfoundationsfrom

Australianindustryornon-governmentagencies;HDRfeesfornon-Commonwealthsupported

domesticstudents;competitive,peer-reviewedresearchgrantincomefromnon-Australian

agencies;otherincomefromnon-Australianagencies;HDRfeesfornon-Commonwealthsupported

internationalstudents.CRCIncomeincludesincomefromaCRCwherethereportingHEPisacore

participant.ItisimportanttonotethatCRCIncomeisreportedbythelatestfinancialyearwhile

incomefromothersourcesisreportedbythelatestcalendaryear.10Weusethecompiledtime

series(from1992to2013)maintainedbyUniversitiesAustralia.11

TogetherwithRBG,thesefoursourcesofincomemakeupTotalResearchFundingasusedinthe

analysisofreturnstoscaleinsection6ofthepaper.Thetwo‘return’variables,weighted

publicationsandHDRcompletions,arederivedfromtheHERDCdataset.Asweonlyusethe2001-

2013timeseriesofTotalResearchFundingforconsistency,weonlyneeddataonweighted

publicationsfrom2001onwards.Duringthisperiod,weightedpublicationsconsistentlycoverfour

maincategories:books,bookchapters,conferencepapers,andjournalarticles(withaweightof

fivegiventobooks).OurHDRcompletionvariableiscalculatedasaweightedsumofthenumberof

mastersandthenumberofPhDs,givingweightsof0.5and1respectivelytothetwocomponents.

TheRBGdataset–isdownloadedfromtheDepartmentofEducationandTraining(DET)website.

RBGfiguresareonlyavailablefrom200112onwards.Thefiguresareinitialallocations,and

componentprogramsmaychangefromyeartoyear.Duetothenarrowperiodofavailabilityof

RBGdata,weonlyuse2001-2013timeseriesofTotalResearchFunding.Furthermore,the

structuralbreakin2000,inwhichANUstartedtocompeteforresearchincome,andthe

inconsistentrecordofCRCIncomebeforeandafter2000deemnarrowingthetimeseriesto2001-

2013necessary.

TheNCGPdataset13–providesdataonresearchgrantsbytheAustralianResearchCouncil(ARC)from2002onwards,withspecifiedannualallocationsofeachandeverygrant.OurmainARC

figuresarethetotalARCfundingannuallyallocatedtoeachuniversity.Insection5,welookintothe

allocationofARCfundingacrossdisciplines.Tothisend,weusethedisciplineclustersspecifiedin

10HERDCspecificationmaychangeslightlyfromyeartoyear.Thedescriptiongivenrelieson2015specification.

11Thedatasetcanbefoundathttps://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/australias-universities/key-facts-and-

data/Research-Intensity---Output/Research-Intensity---Output#.Ve67nkvlfwJ.12ThecurrentsuiteofRBGwasestablishedin2001toreplacethepreviousresearchquantumandresearchrelated

programs,comprehensiverecordsofwhicharenotheldbytheDET.13Theoriginaldatasetsaredownloadablefromhttp://www.arc.gov.au/grants-dataset.

10

the2010ExcellenceResearchAustralia(ERA)EvaluationemployedbytheFederalGovernment.

‘Disciplines’aredeterminedbythefour-digitFieldsofResearch(FOR)codeasidentifiedinthe

AustralianandNewZealandStandardResearchClassification(ANZSRC2008).

Animportantcontributionofourpaperisinreconcilingthe2008FORsystemwithitspredecessor,

the1998ResearchFields,CoursesandDisciplines(RFCD)classificationsystem.Forthispurpose,we

utilisetheone-to-multiplemapbetweenRFCDcodesandFORcodesthatcanbefoundinthe

ANZSRCcorrespondencetables.14Togetherwithinformationontheproportionofeachproject’s

researchcontentattributabletoeachofthecomponentRFCD/FORcode,themaphelps

consistentlyidentifytheproportionoffundingtakenupbyeachFORcode.Wesubsequently

calculatetheamalgamatedARCfundwithineachdisciplineclustertoeachuniversityeachyear.

TheNHMRCdataset15–providesdataonresearchgrantsbytheNationalHealthandResearchCouncil.ThemethodofcompilationissimilartothatoftheNCGPdataset.Theonlydifferenceis

thatdataonthepercentagecontributedbyeachRFCD/FORcodetoeachprojectisnotavailablein

theNHMRCdataset.Wethushavetoattributetheentirefundingofaprojecttoitsmaindiscipline,

acompromisethatmayslightlybiasthealreadypredominantclusters–BiomedicalandClinical

HealthSciences(BCH)andPublicAlliedHealthSciences(PAHS).However,sincewearemost

concernedwithvariationsovertimeoftheallocation,thisbiasshouldbesmall.Finally,grants

allocatedtoprojectswithoutspecifiedresearchdisciplineisclassifiedas‘unspecified’,andthosefor

infrastructureareclassifiedas‘infrastructure’.

14Forexample,ifanRFCDcodecorrespondstotwoFORcodes,theARCfundallocatedtothatparticularRFCDcodeis

brokenintotwoequalamountsassignedtoeachoftheseFORcodes.15Theoriginaldatasetsseparatedbycommencementyear(1990-1999,2000-2009,2010-2019)aredownloadablefrom

http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants-funding/research-funding-statistics-and-data.

11

Figure1:Researchfundingbysource,2013

*Figuresfor‘OtherACGRSchemes’iscomputedastheresidualoftheCompetitiveIncomesubtractingARCandNHMRCgrants.

TotalFunding($5291m)

CompetitiveIncome($1680m;31.75%of

total)

ARC($770m;14.55%of

total)

NHMRC($625m;11.87%of

total)

OtherACGRSchemes*

($285m;5.39%oftotal)

RBG($1670m;31.56%of

total)

OtherIncome($1941m;36.68%of

total)

OtherPublicSources($845m;15.97%of

total)

IndustryandOtherSources

($922m;17.43%oftotal)

CRCs($104m;1.97%of

total)

12

Figure2:Fundingsourcebyuniversitygroups

Figure3:Fundingallocationbyuniversitygroups

33.94%

28.75%

29.84%

7.475%

competitive publicindustry CRC

ATN

50.62%

22.16%

25.37%1.851%

competitive publicindustry CRC

Go8

41.54%

30.84%

24.77%2.849%

competitive publicindustry CRC

IRU

44.06%

23.03%

27.22%

5.689%

competitive publicindustry CRC

Other

Reference year: 2013

13

9.374%

67.11%

10.62%

12.9%

ATN Go8IRU Other

Total Funding

6.677%

72.88%

8.366%

12.08%

ATN Go8IRU Other

ARC4.243%

83.61%

7.073%5.074%

ATN Go8IRU Other

NHMRC

11.09%

63.66%

13.61%

11.64%

ATN Go8IRU Other

Public Funding

10.55%

66.82%

10.02%

12.62%

ATN Go8IRU Other

Industry funding

23.37%

43.13%

10.19%

23.32%

ATN Go8IRU Other

CRC

Reference year: 2013

14

Figure4

Figures5

15

16

Figure6

Figure7

17

18

Figure8

Figure9

19

20

Figure10

Figure11

21

22

Figure12

23

Table1:UniversityGroupsATN QueenslandUniversityofTechnology,UniversityofTechnologySydney,RMITUniversity,Universityof

SouthAustralia,CurtinUniversity.Go8 UniversityofWesternAustralia,MonashUniversity,AustralianNationalUniversity,Universityof

Adelaide,UniversityofQueensland,UniversityofMelbourne,UniversityofNewSouthWales,UniversityofSydney.

IRUa CharlesDarwinUniversity,FlindersUniversity,GriffithUniversity,JamesCookUniversity,LaTrobeUniversity,MurdochUniversity,UniversityofNewcastle.

Other AustralianCatholicUniversity,BondUniversity,CentralQueenslandUniversity,CharlesSturtUniversity,DeakinUniversity,EdithCowanUniversity,MacquarieUniversity,SouthernCrossUniversity,SwinburneUniversityofTechnology,FederationUniversityAustralia,UniversityofCanberra,UniversityofNewEngland,UniversityofNotreDameAustralia,UniversityofSouthernQueensland,UniversityofTasmania,UniversityofWesternSydney,UniversityofWollongong,UniversityoftheSunshineCoast,VictoriaUniversity.

a:TheUniversityofNewcastleleftIRUinDecember2014.Inourstudy,groupmemberstatusistakenasinyear2013.

24

Table2:Researchfunding(asapercentageofGDP)bysources,1992-2013

Year TotalFunding(A=B+C+D)

CompetitiveIncome

(B=B1+B2+B3)

RBG(C) OtherSources(D=D1+D2+D3)

ARC(B1) NHMRC(B2) OtherACGRSchemes(B3)

OtherPublicIncome(D1)

IndustryandOtherIncome

(D2)

CRC(D3)

1992 0.0631 0.0162 0.0246

1993 0.0624 0.0162 0.0258

1994 0.0636 0.0142 0.0182 0.0369

1995 0.061 0.0153 0.0208 0.0386

1996 0.0649 0.0163 0.0199 0.0387

1997 0.0658 0.0171 0.0217 0.0436

1998 0.0649 0.0181 0.0211 0.0429

1999 0.0673 0.0195 0.0217 0.0432

2000 0.0692 0.0845 0.0174 0.0245 0.0481 0.0119

2001 0.2891 0.0672 0.1295 0.0924 0.0209 0.0275 0.054 0.011

2002 0.2916 0.0672 0.1288 0.0956 0.0245 0.0291 0.0545 0.012

2003 0.3055 0.0784 0.1268 0.1003 0.0268 0.0322 0.0546 0.0135

2004 0.3026 0.0823 0.123 0.0974 0.0403 0.0275 0.0145 0.0335 0.0512 0.0127

2005 0.3079 0.088 0.1181 0.1017 0.0467 0.0295 0.0118 0.0373 0.051 0.0135

2006 0.3252 0.0921 0.1128 0.1203 0.0497 0.0303 0.0120 0.0474 0.0603 0.0126

2007 0.3259 0.093 0.106 0.1269 0.0453 0.0331 0.0146 0.0566 0.0592 0.0111

2008 0.3264 0.0931 0.0992 0.134 0.0421 0.036 0.015 0.0616 0.0624 0.01

2009 0.3216 0.0972 0.101 0.1234 0.0447 0.0405 0.012 0.0608 0.0529 0.0098

2010 0.3521 0.118 0.1047 0.1294 0.0451 0.0392 0.0337 0.0621 0.0585 0.0088

2011 0.3274 0.1006 0.1041 0.1227 0.0465 0.0393 0.0149 0.0583 0.057 0.0074

2012 0.3356 0.1067 0.1085 0.1204 0.0496 0.0392 0.0179 0.0575 0.055 0.0078

2013 0.3366 0.1085 0.1074 0.1206 0.0496 0.0403 0.0186 0.0545 0.0594 0.0067

Averageannualchangefromthefirstdatayearto2013 1.28% 2.61% -1.55% 2.77% 2.33% 5.64% 2.81% 5.95% 4.29% -4.32%Changefrom2004to2013 11.24% 31.83% -12.68% 23.82% 23.08% 46.55% 28.28% 62.69% 16.02% -47.24%

Note:DataforB,C,D1,D2andD3isobtainedfromHERDCdatasetasdescribedinsection2.DataforB1andB2iscompiledseparatelyfromtheARCandNHMRCdatasetsrespectively.DataonnominalGDPiscollectedfromtheAustralianBureauofStatistics,5206.0Australian

25

NationalAccounts.ThedatainabsolutetermsforARCandNHMRCmaybedownwardlybiasedinthebeginningyearsofthecorrespondingdatasets,duetothefactthatgrantsarerecordedbycommencementyear.However,sincethemajorityofARCgrantsspanaperiodofthreeyearsorless,weexcludeonlydatapointsinthefirsttwoyearsofthecorrespondingdataset.NHMRCdatasetstartsfrom1990,howeverwealsoexcludethedatapointsin1992and1993ofthisdataset,duetothelongerspanofNHMRCgrantscomparedtothoseARCones.Foranalysesonthesharesoffunding,wehoweverkeeptheentiredatasets,assumingthatthissortofbiasaffectsalluniversitiesanddisciplinesequally.