And the winner is … On rankings and charts of economists: some provocative ideas

Abstract

The attempt to measure the quality of universities, faculties or individual scientists in terms of ranking analysis is a common feature of ever growing importance not only in the economic discipline. Such rankings not only satisfy the desire to compare but also decide increasingly about resource allocations, research orientations and, even more fundamental, about career opportunities of scientists. Despite the growing methodological critique mounted against such rankings, there is no evidence of its disappearance or, least, the limitation of its impact. In addition to the fundamental critique that rankings attempt to measure the immeasurable, the article points out the discriminative potential of rankings which show a systematic bias against plural and heterodox thinking and it tests the robustness of relevant rankings by implementing alternative criteria.