The rankings provided by RePEc are becoming increasingly popular. They are far from perfect, though. One frequent criticism is that institution rankings depend on the size of the institution, as they simply add the scores of all affiliated economists. It is unfortunately not possible to offer per-capita rankings, as the registration system does not distinguish between faculty and students. What one could do, however, is to count only the top x people from every institution. The question is what this x should be.
We want to ask the RePEc community to determine this x with the poll below. The vote will be open for a month, the option closest to the median will be selected.
A few technicalities: As economists with multiple affiliations have to set shares for each, those shares will therefore also be used to determine who counts up to x. This means that more than x people will likely count towards the institution’s score. Also, institutions with fewer than x registered economists will not be compensated for the remainder of the allocation.
The RePEc Blog 
The fact that the registration system does not distinguish between faculty and students does not prevent to compute things per-capita right? It just treats everyone registered at an institution equally. Why not also consider this option together with the top x people from every institution?
The issue is that this would discourage lesser authors from registering. Departments would only want their top people listed.
Size matters. Otherwise an institution that consists of one member Nobel winner will rank equally as another consisting of 20 Nobel winners…ridiculous. Obviously everybody shoud prefer to study in the second one.
On the other hand, an institution with 1000 faculty, each with one mediocre publication would carry a lot of weight but shoud rank below a much smaller institution with few faculty but many oustanding publications each.
I guess we have an subjective ranking problem here, which I am not able to manage. Imagine Trip Advisor ranking restaurants according to an algebraic formulae!. Cannot be done. They do the ranking according to a simple average of subjective individual evaluations, and they inform you about the individual evaluation history of each voter.
Instead of the mean, or the top N, I would use the CES. This has the advantage that it is strictly increasing in the number of people — encouraging all to register — while the appropriate choice of parameter puts the emphasis on the top performers.