An evaluation of the Australian Research Council's journal ranking

As part of its program of ‘Excellence in Research for Australia’ (ERA), the Australian Research Council ranked journals into four categories (A*, A, B, and C) in preparation for their performance evaluation of Australian universities. The ranking is important because it likely to have a major impact on publication choices and research dissemination in Australia. The ranking is problematic because it is evident that some disciplines have been treated very differently than others. This paper reveals weaknesses in the ERA journal ranking and highlights the poor correlation between ERA rankings and other acknowledged metrics of journal standing. It highlights the need for a reasonable representation of journals ranked as A* in each scientific discipline.

Research highlights▶ This paper examines the ‘Excellence in Research for Australia’ (ERA) initiative. ▶ ERA lacks rigour in quantity and quality of journals within each category. ▶ Limitations of ERA will hamper disciplines with insufficient journals ranked A*. ▶ Discrepancies detract from ERA's credibility and impartiality and warrant revision. ▶ ERA should consider replacing the 4 categories with a metric such as SNIP or h-index.