RePEc rankings are surprisingly popular, despite their experimental status, in fact this is the most read topic on this blog. So to cater to the interest of our users, let us add another ranking… RePEc has been ranking institutions for quite a while now, using the institutions listed in EDIRC. This ranks, say, at the department level, not at the university level. This is detrimental to institutions where economists are scattered in various departments, in particular in departments that are not listed in EDIRC, for example law, political sciences and statistics. A new ranking is now computed that assembles all authors within the top level institution for their affiliation(s), say a university, a government, etc. Current results are here.
The methodology is the following. For affiliations listed in EDIRC, the top level is used. That would typically be a university. For affiliations not listed in EDIRC, the homepage domain of the institution submitted by the author is matched with any institutions listed in EDIRC. If no match is found, it is taken as is. Finally, as usual with multiple affiliations, a weighing scheme is used to distribute the author’s score across all affiliations.
Note a few particularities. All components of the University of London (LSE, Imperial College, etc.) are all merged into one. All subdivisions of a national government are also merged. US Federal Reserve Banks, however, are not merged, as they are top level in their respective states.
Just two things I would like to share:
1. Imperial College is no longer under the University of London. It was one year ago the Queen came and announced that. So as a formal student, I think it would be great to see the independence of ranking for Imperial College.(even I don’t think we have a proper economics department!)
2. I cannot understand the ranking of 166, ‘City University’? Where is this ‘City University’? In Canada, France, or HongKong? Please kindly let me know!
Other than that, great work!keep going!
Thanks, I will amend the record for Imperial College. And City University is in Hong Kong. Both amendments will be visible with next month’s update.
What is the criterion for “aggregation” ?
You say that the University of London colleges are aggregated together, but the LSE appears separately — isn’t it part of the U of London?
See : http://www.lon.ac.uk/colleges_institutes
Shouldn’t the Paris universities be aggregated in a similar way? Why not aggregate Jourdan with other Paris institutions? I’m not saying it should be, I’m just wondering about the criterion. Besides, the Paris School of Economics now “incorporates” Jourdan, as far as I can make out from their website.
It has long been known that the disaggregation of French and other European schools/universities/research institutes has been “costly” in terms of ranking, so your procedure should presumably raise “European” rankings, but I don’t seem to see that.
Keep the good work.
I do not see where LSE appears separately in the ranking.
The aggregation criterion is how institutions are listed is how institutions are listed in EDIRC, where I simply take the top level.
France is a sorry mess, as many institutions are not part of a pyramidal hierarchy, but may be part of several top level institutions. It is not my role to solve this Gordian knot. But I welcome any modifications.
>I do not see where LSE appears separately in the ranking.
That’s because I clicked on your first link mistakenly believing that was it.
LSE, Imperial College, and University College London etc. have always been effectively separate universities. True the degrees are from the “University of London” (I have an MSc from LSE) and there are a few shared facilities but it is pretty much like the University of California which you list as separate institutions.