New issue of Administration

Frances Ruane’s paper is useful in its highlighting policymaking that is not based on evidence and dependency on ‘expert’ group and consultants’ reports.

The CSO has improved it range of data in recent times but in the enterprise area, we tend to be in the same boat as Malta, Cyprus and Luxembourg.

Given the State support of enterprise over 60 years, it’s strange that policymakers would not see merit in longitudinal studies on firms in sectors they target.

Company survival data is not also available.

Thirty years ago, David Birch, an MIT economist, produced research on what he termed high growth and ‘gazelle’ firms.

Eurostat/OECD defines high growth firms as: “All enterprises with average annualised growth greater than 20% per annum, over a three year period, and with ten or more employees at the beginning of the observation period. Growth is thus measured by the number of employees and by turnover.”

In recent times, attention has been focused on these firms because they are responsible for a disproportionate amount of job creation.

About 6% of all UK firms employing more than 10 people, generated half of the new jobs created by existing businesses between 2002 and 2008.

There is a common misconception that these firms would typically be in the high tech sector.

It appears that Irish ministers and other policymakers are among the deluded – – with serious implications.

Frances Ruane says:

In recent years academic institutions have increasingly emphasised the importance of peer-reviewed, international journal articles in promotion processes. While this emphasis has merit, it leaves little incentive for academics to undertake policy research. This is not just an Irish problem. In the UK the immediate impact of the research-assessment exercise was a dramatic reduction in the volume of policy-relevant research in the 1980s.

An analysis by a unit of Thomson Reuters found that in respect of 768 economics & business, articles and reviews, produced at Irish third level in the period 1998-2007, the proportion of uncited papers in economic and business was relatively high (40.8% cf 28.5% average of all research for Ireland), the percentage above world average was markedly lower than elsewhere and the percentage that was relatively highly cited was not much more than half the Ireland average (3.6% cf 6.2%). “This does not suggest that research in this area is currently strong in Ireland.”

Michael H
I break my posting silence here. The report you refer to (http://www.hea.ie/files/Research%20Strengths%20in%20Ireland_0.pdf) is very partial in that it looks only where the light shines (ie in the journals that are listed in the ISI database). There is a vast and growing discussion on the merits and otherwise of the impact factor, and that pertains to the coverage of the data.
As a journal editor i can state with full confidence that not all good journals are covered in the ISI database used, nor are all journals therein good (for any given value of good)
Second, if we look at the commentary we see for business (wherein i lurk)
” Irish business research has shown strong improvement in terms of rates of citation since 2004. From a low base (citation impact = 0.56 – much lower than world average) Irish papers are now being cited at better than world average (citation impact = 1.27 in 2007). This improvement is complemented by the increase in research volume illustrated in table 1.02.09. Ireland’s ranking within the comparator group has shot up to 5th, behind Scotland, the USA, Northern Ireland and the UK.”

The economics commentary discusses the bias in teh data arising from teh absolute dominance of US journals.

We also see “Economics & business produces a uniquely bimodal distribution. This suggests a split between a group of relatively high performing units and other units with much less internationally competitive research. ” this of course fits right in with the findings of Tol – there is probably a longer tail of non-research active people in E&B than other areas. Now, I would perform fairly radical change but im not in charge….alas.

David
1 Kings 12-11

I must go now and do some more work.

Nice to read it.

@ All

This seems to me to be one of the most significant papers to emerge from the ESRI in recent years. It states the obvious to a certain extent viz that policy decisions should be evidence based. The Fiscal Advisory Council has shown in its recent report that the “stimulus package” adopted by Ireland’s current excuse for a government is the very antithesis of such an approach. However, the fact that the problem. which has been the nemesis of the Irish state since its foundation, is at last being addressed by expert opinion is to be welcomed.

The rest is just noise.

@DOCM

Two very different articles on both theme and tone.

For me, the Stephens Collins article is to be welcomed and seems to indicate a definite frustration at government; a government that he has batted for in a somewhat partial way. Not before time, but to be welcomed. Well done, Stephen Collins.

That the dogs in the street know that the younger generation is being shafted by government and vested interests has hardly gone unnoticed by the Troika officials.

In relation to the Donal O’Donovan article, why should Europe rush with relief to an Ireland where lavish payments to vested interests are still the order of the day? [We are still paying those tribunal king’s ransoms, I assume, and the €5000 per month Katmandu mileage allowances to TDS]

True, the EZ powers shafted Ireland, but Irish leaders seem perfectly content to shaft other less powerful Irish people. The high moral ground of the Irish government, and Irish people including myself, in relation to the bank debt is merely an island in a very low bog of morality.

The real reason for EZ delay on Ireland odious debt may be the imperative of Spain or that the ‘best boy in class’ does not need grinds, but if they want to look for other reasons, they are there, aplenty.

.

@DOCM
re: Bond spreads.

Although I am not familiar with the area, I think the reason probably has to do with the improved cash reserves and the partial removal of the January 2014 funding cliff. From recollection, Seamus Coffey put the cash reserve position at approx 18 billion for end 2012 and pretty high for end 2013 and 2014.
Any foreseeable immediate danger to Ireland is therefore removed.

If somebody buys a five year bond now, for instance, in two years time it will be safely within the ECB snake or whatever system now seems likely to emerge. Longer terms bonds are probably a good bet, particularly in light of the EZ commitment on bank debt.

In the light of other improvements, it is a real pity that the domestic discourse shows little sign facing reality, as outlined in the SC article.

PS: Meantime the domestic sector is struggling very badly and even the export economy is being hit by the recession in Europe. The July and Aug income tax results in particular show a very weak trend.