This report is a follow-up to the funding investigation´s proposal for a quality-based funding system. The focus is on scholarly publications. The proposed Swedish model is compared with a similar model from Norway.
Swedish higher education institutions require a higher level of fixed funding for research. The funding investigation´s final report recommended a funding system based on quality indicators: citations, teachers with doctorates, external funding and female professors.
The Swedish system is designed to be able to adjust the differences between research areas. In Norway, all types of publications are included and a register of journals and publishers has been developed. An attempt was made to see how the models work when tested on empirical material from Swedish and Norwegian universities.
The first investigation used material from six large Swedish universities. The results showed that both models could be used to satisfactorily estimate the scope of research.
The second investigation used material from four Norwegian universities. The results showed that both the Swedish and Norwegian models are able to provide an adequate description of scholarly publications.
The choice between the Swedish and Norwegian models is a choice between the structure of incentives. The Norwegian system has extensive coverage and transparency but it is unclear whether quantity or quality is the priority. The Swedish model is, as yet, untried but is not as transparent and, because of the limitations of the Thomas/ISI database, offers less coverage. However, it is the latter that gives the Swedish model a definite advantage: the use of field normalised citation rates. A citations indicator gives a clear quality incentive. The combination of articles and citation rate is hard to manipulate.
The report points out that the Swedish model needs improving. The report suggests Humanities and Social Sciences material should be complemented by articles from the European ERIH database.