Revenue and Growth Research Institute supports the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and endorses an approach to research assessment grounded in substantive judgment, methodological rigor, and intellectual integrity. The Institute holds that the quality of research should be assessed on the basis of its own characteristics — including research design, transparency of reasoning, rigor of analysis, and genuine contribution to knowledge — rather than the prestige of the publication venue or journal-based metrics.

What this means in practice

We believe that research and analytical outputs should be assessed primarily on the basis of:

• the substantive importance of the question under examination;
• the clarity of the research design and analytical logic;
• methodological rigor and conceptual precision;
• transparency of reasoning and traceability of conclusions;
• the genuine contribution of the work to understanding its subject matter.

Revenue and Growth Research Institute does not regard journal title, journal rank, impact factor, or other journal-based metrics as sufficient or decisive grounds for judging the quality of a particular work, the integrity of its design, or the significance of an author’s intellectual contribution.

What counts as a meaningful research output

The Institute recognizes the value of a broad range of research outputs. Meaningful contributions may take the form not only of journal articles, but also of:

• working papers;
• analytical notes;
• policy briefs;
• conceptual frameworks or models;
• glossaries and structured conceptual systems;
• methodological materials;
• datasets, research tools, and other forms of intellectual output.

This approach allows research assessment to recognize a wider spectrum of scholarly and analytical contribution.

Where these principles apply at Revenue and Growth Research Institute

At its current stage of development, RGRI applies these principles primarily to:

• the editorial assessment and publication of research materials;
• author requirements and submission standards;
• the description of author contributions;
• the formation of the Institute’s research and expert community;
• the internal evaluation of research initiatives connected to the Institute’s programme.

Institutional stage and further development

These principles are currently applied primarily through its editorial, expert, and research practices and will be progressively formalized through publication standards, guidance documents, and internal review procedures.

The Institute understands this commitment as part of a broader dedication to research integrity, methodological rigor, responsible scholarly communication, and more substantive standards of evaluating knowledge than those based on simplified reputational proxies.

• In brief
• intrinsic merit matters more than venue prestige;
• methodological rigor matters more than reputational proxies;
• diverse research outputs deserve recognition;
• research assessment should be explicit, proportionate, and intellectually honest.