Nature Index - Top Academic Institutions is a yearly ranking from Nature Index. The data is compiled from their online database of 10000+ institutions whose main focus is natural sciences. The intent is to rank these institutions by the quality of the research conducted there, based on primary research articles published in the most important journals of their fields. The ranking aims for objectivity but it does have some subjective qualities, if nothing else, in the selection of journals whose articles are considered for the rankings. The data can be viewed as a general listing or focusing on one of the four following fields: Life Sciences; Chemistry; Earth & Environmental Sciences; Physical Sciences.
The publishing group behind Nature Index has been around for about 150 years (well, the original British journal from which it takes its name has, anyway). Nature, the journal, and several others published by the Springer Nature Group, are among the most important scientific journals in the world. This ranking though has only been in existence since 2014/2015.
The Nature Index website has plenty of open access articles that can be of interest to scientists (and to science buffs/nerds like me) and is a real pleasure to browse. Every year they also publish great supplements with mini rankings and related articles; some of which focus on particular areas of research while others concentrate on the work being done in a specific country.
Key facts about the ranking
- Publisher: Nature Index, United Kingdom
- Latest ranking publication date: 15 June, 2024
- Publication frequency: Annual
- Geographic focus: Global
- Ranking type: University rankings.
- Year of first publication: 2015
- 4937 universities in ranking
Ranking table 2024 Nature Index: Research Leaders Academic Sector
-
- #12
- Fudan University
-
- #19
- Yale University
-
- #21
- Wuhan University
-
- #37
- Jilin University
-
- #42
- Kyoto University
-
- #45
- Hunan University
-
- #57
- Duke University
-
- #63
- Osaka University
-
- #104
- Emory University
-
- #108
- Aarhus University
-
- #109
- Utrecht University
-
- #110
- Hokkaido University
-
- #112
- Beihang University
-
- #113
- KU Leuven
-
- #114
- Uppsala University
-
- #117
- Nagoya University
-
- #118
- Yonsei University
-
- #121
- Monash University
-
- #122
- Boston University
-
- #126
- Jinan University
-
- #127
- University of Basel
-
- #128
- Fuzhou University
-
- #132
- University of Utah
-
- #137
- University of Geneva
-
- #143
- Leiden University
-
- #150
- Southwest University
-
- #151
- Rice University
-
- #152
- Lund University
-
- #154
- Tel Aviv University
-
- #157
- Henan University
-
- #162
- Radboud University
-
- #163
- Yangzhou University
-
- #165
- University of Bern
-
- #170
- Shanghai University
-
- #171
- Anhui University
-
- #176
- Donghua University
-
- #180
- Ghent University
-
- #182
- Jiangsu University
-
- #184
- Brown University
-
- #186
- Qingdao University
-
- #188
- University of Oslo
-
- #189
- Westlake University
-
- #197
- Kyushu University
-
- #198
- Nanchang University
What is really measured and how - Methodology DeepDive
Institutions from five sectors (academic, corporate, government, healthcare, NPO/NGO) are ranked, according to the year’s quantity of publications and quality of the research they reflect, in what Nature Index (or more precisely, the panel of experts chosen for the task) deems to be the most important scientific journals of the time. The ranking is based on a point system, each institution receives points for whole articles (count/AC) and shared articles (fractional article count/FC).
The whole article count is one point per article and the point for fractional count is divided evenly among all the institutions involved. The final ranking holds the Share count as the most important and institutions are ranked by their performance there. The closer those two numbers are (Share & Count) indicates an institution which is more self-dependent and less likely to participate in collaborative work.
- Types of Data Collected Directly by the Publisher
- their database contains the number of articles published by over 10000 institutions
- External databases/data providers used
-
- Criteria Classification
100% Academic Performance (publications, i.e. research outcome)
- Research publications and citations
- Academic reputation - survey or other
- Student Survey
- Internationalization (% of foreign staff/students/exchange)
- Employer reputation survey or Salary data
- Methodology
- https://www.natureindex.com/faq#methodology
Our take - How useful is the ranking for students
- Rating
- 3.0 / 5.0
- Popularity
- Google results for: Nature Index "Research Leaders": 107000
- PROS
- uses recent data from the scientific community
- a lot of information for anyone interested in science
- CONS
- focus limited to scientific fields
- liberal arts and more general institutions excluded from rankings
- Practical use
This ranking and much of what is available on their website is a great resource for scientific minded folk. Students who want to follow a career in science will find it useful in their search for a university, but also when the time comes to apply for a job, since the Nature Index includes all types of institutions where graduates may later find employment. The rankings by field are even more helpful, if a young person already has an idea of where their true interests lie.
- Criticism
Most of the criticism of the Nature Index and its methodology has centered around the selection of journals from which the article counts for the ranking are taken. Some critics also took issue with how the experts who choose the journals themselves are selected and complaints were made regarding over-representation of some fields. These critiques helped to bring about changes which resulted in the inclusion of articles from a wider selection of journals to the database.
Though it is generally accepted in the scientific community that article publication is a valid indicator of the amount/quality of research produced by an institution, the Nature Index has also been criticized for not making any attempt to normalize the numbers, i.e. that they use raw data without taking into account external factors, such as institution size for example.
Cora Lee Paddock, UniversityGuru: 20 August, 2024