Managing discrepancies in evaluation methods for interdisciplinary research programme: The case of WPI in Japan

Interdisciplinary research has recently been emphasised in science and technology policies throughout the world. Numerous organisational approaches are directed at accelerating interdisciplinary research; consequently, new research institutes have been established at the university level or as public institutions. However, principles of management regarding evaluation of interdisciplinary research have not been developed sufficiently in comparison to ordinary mono-disciplinary research. A practical approach is the use of the peer review by a small set of experts; however, the selection bias of peer reviewers, the lack of expertise in emerging disciplines, and a burden for evaluation tasks are currently pointed out as developmental needs. Alternatively, another approach that has been proposed is a more efficient and robust routine for applying scientometric intelligence with established bibliometric indicators and comprehensive publication databases. In this study, an empirical observation was conducted to examine six interdisciplinary research institutes operated for the last five years under an initiative of the Japanese government; results were expected to provide evidence regarding similarities of the two aforementioned approaches. Additionally, a discussion regarding the underlying reasons for possible discrepancies was initiated.