			Home About us Contact

Economics Departments (economics + department)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	58%
Humanities and Social Sciences	41%

Kinds of Economics Departments

australian economics department

Selected Abstracts

THE LIFE CYCLE RESEARCH OUTPUT OF PROFESSORS IN AUSTRALIAN ECONOMICS DEPARTMENTS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS BASED ON SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

ECONOMIC PAPERS: A JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS AND POLICY, Issue 2 2003
MITA BHATTACHARYA
First page of article [source]

SURVEYING UNIVERSITY STUDENT STANDARDS IN ECONOMICS

ECONOMIC PAPERS: A JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS AND POLICY, Issue 2 2005
Peter Abelson
In late 2003 and early 2004 the Economic Society of Australia surveyed the Heads of Economics Departments in Australia to determine their views on three main issues: student standards; major factors affecting these standards; and policy implications. This paper describes the main results of the survey, reviews the conduct and value of this kind of survey, and discusses policy implications for economics in universities. Most respondents considered that student standards have declined and that the main causes include lower entry standards, high student/staff ratios, and a declining culture of study. However, some respondents argued that standards are multi-dimensional and that people may properly attach different weights to different attributes. Strong precautions assuring anonymity to respondents minimised strategic responses, but may not have eliminated them entirely. However, the respondents' views were based largely on experience rather than evidence and a major finding of this paper is the need for more evidence on standards and on the factors that influence them. Most respondents favoured a decentralised university-based approach to dealing with these issues, contending that centralised accreditation is inappropriate and that market forces would promote quality issues. In the writer's view, externally set and assessed exams as part of university examination procedures would lift standards and send out improved market signals. [source]

A Multidimensional Ranking of Australian Economics Departments

THE ECONOMIC RECORD, Issue 256 2006
JOAN R. RODGERS
This study uses cluster analysis to classify Australian economics departments into groups that have similar quantities of research output, measured by two publication counts, and similar quality of research output, measured by a citation count. Three groups of departments are identified and factor analysis is used to rank the groups. Whether research output is measured in total or on a per staff basis, Melbourne is in the group that ranks first, the remaining members of the ,group of eight' are in one or other of the top two groups, and at least 15 other departments are in the third-ranked group. [source]

Rankings of Australian Economics Departments, 1988,2000

THE ECONOMIC RECORD, Issue 241 2002
Dipendra Sinha
This paper provides new rankings for Australian university economics departments for the periods 1988,2000, 1988,1994 and 1994,2000 using the ECONLIT database. We rank economics departments using two different journal ranking criteria - one based on citations and the other based on perceptions of journal quality. In addition, we provide updates on the rankings using the Towe and Wright (1995) methodology. We find that the perception-based rankings are quite different from the citation-based rankings. [source]

H. G. J. as Biographer's Subject: Some Autobiographical Writings

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, Issue 3 2001
D.E. Moggridge
In the last decade of his life, Harry Johnson (1923,1977) wrote a number of autobiographical pieces. He published three relating to his periods in Cambridge (1946,47 and 1949,55), but he did not publish two long autobiographical notes and a series of memoirs of his undergraduate career at the University of Toronto (1939,43), his first teaching job as the entire economics department at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, Nova Scotia (1943,44) and his later period in England (1966,74). This material provides a number of clues as to the way Harry wished to be remembered and the paper develops some of the strongest autobiographical themes common to them. [source]

Professor Ludwig M. Lachmann (1906-1990): Scholar, Teacher, and Austrian School Critic of Late Classical Formalism in Economics

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, Issue 3 2000
Stephan Boehm
Ludwig M. Lachmann was born in Berlin in 1906 and died in Johannesburg in 1990. For more than forty years, until his retirement in 1972, Lachmann established himself as a prominent South African economist and for a time served as head of the economics department at the University of Witwatersrand. From 1974 to 1987, he worked with Professor Israel Kirzner in New York City to give new shape and life to the older Austrian school of economics. Lachmann influenced a small army of modern Austrians to discard the elaborate formalisms of orthodox economics for a "radical subjectivism" that had its roots in the teachings of the founder of the Austrian school, Carl Menger. Here a small platoon of scholars offer their thoughts about Lachmann, his contributions to economic reasoning, and his eccentric but engaging character. First hand reports explain what their mentor taught and what his students took away. Lavoie makes the case that Lachmann's "radical subjectivism" took a rhetorical turn toward the end of Lachmann's career in New York City. In addition, Kirzner reports on his long and most productive relationship with Lachmann and provides additional insights about the seminal role of the Austrian Economics Seminar at New York University from 1985 to 1987 in giving shape to the modern Austrian revival. This article is the written version of a "Remembrance and Appreciation Session" held on June 28, 1999 at the History of Economics Society meeting at the University of North Carolina in Greensboro. It is one of an ongoing series that appears in the July issues of this journal. [source]

WHY DO AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES FARE SO POORLY IN INTERNATIONAL RANKINGS?

ECONOMIC PAPERS: A JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS AND POLICY, Issue 4 2007
EVIDENCE FOR ECONOMICS DEPARTMENTS AND SOME HYPOTHESES
This paper reviews the literature that ranks universities and economics departments. In international rankings Australian universities fare well, but the most popular (ARWU and THES) measures are biased in ways that favour Australian universities. In international rankings of economics departments by their research performance, Australian universities fare poorly, relative to natural comparators. Several hypotheses can explain this phenomenon: inappropriate measures, low productivity, time spent on non-research activities, age and cohort effects and lack of resources. [source]

A Multidimensional Ranking of Australian Economics Departments

Rankings of Australian Economics Departments, 1988,2000

RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY OF AUSTRALIAN ACADEMIC ECONOMISTS: HUMAN-CAPITAL AND FIXED EFFECTS,

AUSTRALIAN ECONOMIC PAPERS, Issue 1 2007
JOAN R. RODGERS
This study investigates why some economics departments in Australian universities are more research productive than others. The hypothesis is simple: research productivity depends upon the human capital of department members and the department-specific conditions under which they work. A Tobit model is used to estimate the magnitude of the two effects. Both are found to be important. Our results help explain why a small number of departments consistently outperform the others in studies that rank Australian economics departments according to research output. [source]