Analysis of the relations between scientometric and economic indicators of Russian universities’ performance

    Daniil Sandler   Affiliation
    ; Dmitry Gladyrev   Affiliation


Purpose – The study focuses on the relationship between universities’ publication activity and such indicators of their economic performance as revenues from extrabudgetary sources and revenues from research.

Research methodology – The study relies on the economic, structural and scientometric data of 49 large Russian universities in a four-year period obtained from the Monitoring of the Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions and the analytical tool SciVal. The research method is a regression analysis with panel data models.

Findings – The study has brought to light some interesting relations between scientometric and economic indicators: among other things, it was shown that higher rates of internationally coauthored publications are positively related with the share of universities’ revenues from extrabudgetary sources. The rates of citation of universities’ publications in journals indexed in major international databases are positively associated with revenues from research. Interestingly, there was a negative relationship between the share of nationally co-authored and the revenue from research.

Practical implications – The results can be used for the strategic management of universities and for developing national policies in the sphere of higher education and science.

Originality/Value – Apart from the most frequently used scientometric indicators such as the number of publications and citations, the following indicators were also included in the analysis: the share of internationally and nationally co-authored (domestic) publications, the share of publications in economics and management, in physics, arts and humanities.

Keyword : economics of universities, higher education management, scientometrics, internationalization of universities, Russia, higher educational institutions, HEIs

How to Cite
Sandler, D., & Gladyrev, D. (2020). Analysis of the relations between scientometric and economic indicators of Russian universities’ performance. Business, Management and Education, 18(2), 331-343.
Published in Issue
Sep 25, 2020
Abstract Views
PDF Downloads
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Azoulay, P., Ding, W., & Stuart, T. (2007). The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 599–623.

Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67.

Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Montobbio, F. (2005). From publishing to patenting: Do productive scientists turn into academi inventors? Revue d ‘économie industrielle, 110(1), 75–102.

Calderini, M., & Franzoni, C. (2004). Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research. An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent applications (Cespri Working Paper, 162). Bocconi University.

Czarnitzki, D., Glänzel, W., & Hussinger, K. (2007). Patent and publication activities of German professors: an empirical assessment of their co-activity. Research Evaluation, 16(4), 311–319.

D’Este, P., Mahdi, S., & Neely, A. (2010). Academic entrepreneurship: What are the factors shaping the capacity of academic researchers to identify and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities (DRUID Working Paper No. 10-5). Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics.

Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.

Fabrizio, K. R., & Di Minin, A. (2008). Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment. Research Policy, 37(5), 914–931.

Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spinout companies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 127–141.

Geiger, R. L. (2004). Knowledge and money: Research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford University Press.

Meyer, M. (2006). Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventorauthors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology. Research Policy, 35(10), 1646–1662.

Polikhina, N. A., & Trostyanskaya, I. B. (2018). University ratings: Development trends, methodology, changes. FGANU “Sociocenter”.

Riviezzo, A., Santos, S. C., Liñán, F., Napolitano, M. R., & Fusco, F. (2019). European universities seeking entrepreneurial paths: the moderating effect of contextual variables on the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 232–248.

Salmi, J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world class universities. The World Bank.

Sandler, D. G., Evsykova, I. A., Bogantseva, S. S., Melnik, D. A., Sterkhov, A. V., & Bondarchuk, D. V. (2019). Usage of integrated indicators in the implementation of programs to improve competitiveness in the context of developing cooperation with the industry and improving the economic sustainability of universities. Russian Journal of Industrial Economics, 12(3), 341–355 (In Russian).

Smith, D. (1999). Burton R. Clark 1998. Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Higher Education, 38, 373–374.

Stephan, P. E., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., & Black, G. (2007). Who’s patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients. Econnomics and Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 71–99.

Van Looy, B., Callaert, J., & Debackere, K. (2006). Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? Research Policy, 35(4), 596–608.

Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., Van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553–564.