Gareth Roberts has handed over his recommendations for the research quality framework (RQF) to the federal government. The aim of the framework is to increase the quality of publically funded research and to make funding more transparent to the public.

There are some potential problems with the RQF. For example, for the RQF to fulfill its purpose, ''research quality'' must be measured. According to the RQF, research quality will be decided by some mixture of the academic, social and economic impact of the research — but how exactly is this mixture to be decided? The problem here is not just practical, but also philosophical and political.

Another problem stems from the fact that universities will be ranked based on quality, and research funding will be allocated accordingly. Many academics and journalists have suggested that this will concentrate research funding to a small group of elite universities. A further problem is that this does not direct funding to where it is most effective. An elite university may not be able to make as good a use of an additional $1 million in funding as a smaller institution, whatever our metric for quality.

Education Minister Julie Bishop has announced that the RQF will be further investigated by an advisory group headed by Australian chief scientist Jim Peacock, but may still be introduced next year.

• Julie Bishop: Research Quality Framework advice on preferred model
• DEST: Research Quality Framework
• DEST: Expert advisory group announced - measuring quality and impact in research (2004)
  
• AVCC: AVCC welcomes release of RQF final advice by the Minister
• Australian: (Snitch) Comparison to British RAE
• Australian: No to skyscrapers in the desert
• Australian: Bidding war for stars
• Australian: Professor walks away nervously from RMIT
• The Age: Heartbreak: elite RMIT team poached
• Australian: Bishop stalls on framework
• Australian: Global rank plan for uni research cash
• ABC: Mixed response to new uni funding plan