of 985Us is merely increased by 2% in 2006–2010, however, the annual TFP
change rate of non-985Us is decreased by 1% in 2006–2010.
Secondly, the decomposition results show that the HSS research TFP
improvements of both groups are mainly attributed to the growth effect caused by
technical change. However, a considerable decline in TEC index offsets the positive
growth effect and drags TFP index into stagnation. To 985Us, the annual growth
rate of TC index is 7%, while that of TEC index is−5%. Similar with this, to
non-985Us, the annual growth rate of TC index is 6%, while their TEC index
experiences a decline of 7%.
Thirdly, the main reason why TEC indexes of HSS disciplines get no significant
improvement in both groups is because that their PTEC indexes are not improved.
This reflects that, in the future of research management, more attention should be
paid to optimize resource allocation of HSS disciplines in universities. To
non-985Us, their SEC index is not improved annually, and their PTEC index is
reduced by 7% annually. To 985Us, their SEC index is increased by 5% annually,
yet their PTEC index is decreased by 10% annually.
5.2.2.2 Cumulative Changes of Research Productivity Relative to Base
Year 2006
To further explore the differences on the cumulative effect caused by yearly
research productivity changes between 985Us and non-985Us, in this subsection,
we set 2006 as the base year, so as to analyze the cumulative changes of TFP index
and its decomposition relative to 2006. Figure5.7plots cumulative yearly progress
of both groups’research TFP relative to 2006 in line chart.
It’s obvious that, across thesefive years, 985Us’TFP index in HSS disciplines is
cumulatively increased by 8.8% relative to the base year. However, most of the
increase is mainly from a prompt rise in the stage of 2009–2010, while in 2006–
Fig. 5.6 Research productivity and its decomposition of 985Us and non-985Us (HSS)
230 5 Dynamic Evaluation on Research Productivity...