FCT

R&D Institutions

Resultado da avaliação 2007 na área de Ciências Jurídicas e Ciências Políticas

Unidade de I&D

CENTRO DE INVESTIGAÇÃO PARA O DESENVOLVIMENTO (CIDES) [LAW-LVT-Lisboa-4088] visitada em 31/01/2008

Classificação: Poor

Comentários do painel de avaliação
Sobre a unidade
There are three groups within the unit, which cannot at the present time be said to constitute a unified centre. It is true that the groups appear themselves to be young and that the centre’s representatives indicate that it has been in existence for a year and a half only. However, the three professors responsible for the three groups are clearly pursuing different and very distinct research projects in contrasting areas and in fact they give no indication of having plans for future collaborative enterprises. The researchers, too, were unable to suggest any specific reason why the centre would contribute to their various unrelated research interests (that range from the psychological aspects of industrial packaging to the role of Portugal in international relations, short-term investments in the stock market and the enhanced efficiency of power lines). The journal, Reflexões, appropriately reflects the extremely disparate nature of the centre’s activities. The nature of the journal’s concerns is so disparate in fact as to deprive the publication of any real focus. It is even difficult to encourage the centre in its activities because, unless it finds a unifying theme, fundamentally it will be unable to establish a centre in any real sense. At the very most it will be able to establish a kind of federation. The centre gave the panel the impression that it would like to undertake projects linking two or more of the groups. What was missing was a sense of any real plans in this respect or any real ideas about how such plans, did they exist, would be implemented. The centre appears to be somewhat unbalanced in terms of the ages and genders of its actual and potential members. The current planning and outlook of the centre does not include demonstrate much aspiration to be internally-minded.
Sobre os grupos de investigação
Grupo de Ciências da Engenharia e do Ambiente [RG-LAW-LVT-Lisboa-4088-139]
Grupo de Ciências Económicas e Empresariais [RG-LAW-LVT-Lisboa-4088-140]
General observations: The group has four members with PhDs and two other members. The suggestion that “general objectives” is “not applicable” is not very convincing, because it is a new centre: presumably it must have some objectives, however ill-defined, in order to have had a rationale for its members coming together in the first place. It appears to have obtained some €290,000 to finance its future activities.
Productivity: The six members list a total of 16 publications since 2003, making an average of 2.6 per member. One wonders whether every member has in fact listed all his/her publications (since in one or two cases nothing appears to have been published since the start of the new millennium, which seems a little hard to believe). The status of some entries is difficult to evaluate e.g. “National Jornal Vida Económica, 2005- (weekly participation)”. Productivity seems a little heavily dependent on the efforts of just one member of the group.
Relevance: Future objectives tend to be given as a list of topics/areas of research. Each of them could mean a multitude of specific things and one would like to know what these are.
Feasibility: More information is needed about what the group has in mind in order to be able to evaluate this properly.
Training: 3 of the 4 members with PhDs indicate some kind of supervising experience as does one of the 2 members without a PhD. In one case the experience appears quite extensive and relates directly to the supervising of doctoral and masters dissertations. In other cases, it is not entirely clear what the experience (which, for example, in one case includes the orientation of stages in the area of professional development) actually amounts to.
Grupo de Ciências Jurídicas, Políticas e Sociais [RG-LAW-LVT-Lisboa-4088-138]
General observations: the group appears to have been in existence for only 18 months. In that period of time its 18 members appear to have organised four seminars and produced two journal special issues or similar. The group appears to have achieved funding amounting to some €300,000 to finance its planned activities up to 2010, but beyond the generic organisation of seminars etc., it is not clear what specific projects the group wishes to use the money for.
Productivity: looking at the CVs, suggests an average of 1.25 publications for the members with PhDs in the period 2003-2006 – which seems a reasonable, though not outstanding, number. Unfortunately, the status of some of the publications is difficult to evaluate.
Relevance: It is a little difficult to assess this since the group states its objectives in terms that are rather generic. One wonders about the extent of the group’s international links in view of the few foreign-language publications that are listed.
Feasibility: One is asked to assess the capacity of the group to transform interesting plans into practical projects that are relevant at the international level. The group certainly includes members with relevant research experience, so to that extent it has the relevant capacity, but more information is needed about the projects the group has in mind.
Training: three of the six members with PhDs list at least some kind of supervising experience. In the case of one member this experience appears to be quite extensive.