posted on 2007-01-01, 00:00authored byHugo Horta, Francisco Veloso, Rocio Grediaga
The practice of having PhDs employed by the university that trained them, commonly called "academic
inbreeding" has long been assumed to have a damaging effect on scholarly practices and achievement.
Despite this perception, existing work on academic inbreeding is scarce and mostly descriptive or
speculative. In this research we show, first, that academic inbreeding can be damaging to scholarly
output. Our estimates suggest that academically inbred faculty generate on average 15% less peer
reviewed publications than their non-inbred counterparts. Second, academically inbred faculty are more
centered in their own institution and less open to the rest of the scientific world. In particular, we
estimate that they are about 40% less likely to exchange information of critical relevance to their
scholarly work with external colleagues. Third, academic inbreeding appears to be detrimental to
scientific output even in leading research universities. Overall, our analysis implies that administrators
and policy makers aiming to develop a thriving research environment in universities should seriously
consider mechanisms to limit this practice. It also explores the role, importance and mechanisms by
which outsiders contribute to create a dynamic and creative environment in knowledge intensive settings.