the growth effect of the west 211Us is not apparent, with thefive-year cumulative
TC growth rate of merely 2%.
Dividing the eastern 211Us into JUs, HSZUs, and OUs, it’s easy tofind that,
though three groups in the eastern 211Us all show strong growth effects, OUs
achievefive-year cumulative TC growth rate of 37%, which is considerably larger
than that of JUs (30%) and HSZUs (33%). It is most because that OUs possess the
late-mover advantage driven by geographic and regional economic development.
Second, SEC indexes of most groups are hardly improved during thefive years.
Except central 211Us and the JUs, the SEC indexes of the rest four groups are in the
downtrend. To the central 211Us and JUs, which are in the status of improvement,
theirfive-year cumulative SEC growth rates are 10 and 1% respectively. While to
the eastern and western 211Us, the HSZUs and OUs, their SEC indexes are
cumulatively decreased by 1, 3, 2 and 2% in thefive years.
Third, PTEC indexes of most groups are not improved significantly. Except the
prominent improvement of HSZUs with afive-year cumulative PTEC growth rate
of 23%, thefive-year cumulative PTEC growth rates of other groups are basically
lower than 7%. Of which, the PTEC index of OUs is cumulatively decreased by 6%
in thefive years.
Forth, since TEC index is composed of SEC index and PTEC index, TEC index
is also not in good status as SEC index and PETC index have poor performance. In
spite of the relatively good performance of the central 211Us and HSZUs, with
cumulative improvement rates approaching 20%, the performances of rest groups
are rather moderate. Of which, the TEC indexes of western 211Us and OUs are
cumulatively decreased by 1 and 7% by the end.
TEC index indicates the overall situation of universities’research resources
allocation and managerial institutions. Thus, poor performance of TEC index shows
that, during this phase of 2006–2010, universities commonly ignored the impor-
tance of optimizing research resources allocation and facilitating institutional
reform. For the long term, if this situation persisted, TEC index would dampen the
sustainable improvement of research productivities.
5.3.2 HSS Disciplines.................................
5.3.2.1 Annual Productivity Change of 211Us by Region
In this subsection, we first analyze and compare the annual changes of
Malmquist-TFP index and its decomposition of 211Us in HSS research among the
different regions categorized above. The detailed results are reported in Tables5.21,
5.22,5.23,5.24,5.25and5.26in Appendix.
Here, wefirst analyze the annual changes of TFP index and its decomposition by
region. See Figs.5.13and5.14for details.
In Fig.5.13, we plotfive-year average of annual changes of TFP indexes of all
regions. It’s obvious that, compared with the consistently improving trend of
238 5 Dynamic Evaluation on Research Productivity...