Autor: Dip Juan Antonio*, Ferro Gustavo**
Institución: (*)Universidad Nacional de Misiones, (**)UCEMA-CONICET
Año: 2025
JEL: I23, C02
Resumen:
Several rating agencies evaluate universities, give scores, and offer rankings. Three global indices have the most reach: ARWU, QS, and THE. They measure the same phenomenon, with different methods, variables, and weights; however, their results are correlated. We aim to answer two questions: Which indicators most strongly explain the variance in global rankings, and what are their implicit importance weights? In other words, our first concern is to explore the “as if” aspect of the story: what are their implicit or underlying weights? As a second concern, we evaluate the reproducibility of these rankings using publicly available data, employing Benefit-of-the-Doubt (BoD) models based on Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), including weight restrictions and a multi-directional extension (MDir_RBoD) to measure indicator-specific efficiency. Analyzing datasets for 2024 reveals that ARWU emphasizes publications, THE highlights industry impact and research quality, while QS focuses on internationalization and sustainability. Unlike prior studies that broadly assessed overall performance, our method offers detailed diagnostics of each indicator’s contribution and areas for improvement. Using the MDir_RBoD model, we provide practical benchmarks for institutions and policymakers, enhancing the understanding of efficiency in university ranking strategies.