The world’s third largest producer of scientific research, Germany, is the origin of the research university and the independent, extra-university research institute. Its dual-pillar research policy differentiates these organizational forms functionally: universities specialize in advanced research-based teaching; institutes specialize intensely on research. Over the past decades this policy affected each sector differently: while universities suffered a lingering “legitimation crisis,” institutes enjoyed deepening “favored sponsorship”—financial and reputational advantages. Universities led the nation’s reestablishment of scientific prominence among the highly competitive European and global science systems after WWII. But sectoral analysis of contributions to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical and health journal publications (1950–2010) finds that Germany’s small to medium-sized independent research institutes have made significant, growing contributions, particularly in publishing in higher impact journals proportionally more than their size. Simultaneously—despite dual-pillar policy implications—the university sector continues to be absolutely and relatively successful; not eclipsed by the institutes. Universities have consistently produced two-thirds of the nation’s publications in the highest quality journals since at least 1980 and have increased publications at a logarithmic rate; higher than the international mean. Indeed, they led Germany into the global mega-science style of production. Contrary to assumed benefits of functional differentiation, our results indicate that relative to their size, each sector has produced approximately similar publication records. While institutes have succeeded, the larger university sector, despite much less funding growth, has remained fundamental to German science production. Considering these findings, we discuss the future utility of the dual-pillar policy.

中文翻译：

---

大学与研究所？德国科学生产的双重支柱，1950-2010

世界第三大科研生产国德国是研究型大学和独立的校外研究所的发源地。它的双支柱研究政策在功能上区分了这些组织形式：大学专注于先进的研究型教学；研究所专注于研究。在过去的几十年里，这项政策对每个部门产生了不同的影响：虽然大学遭受了挥之不去的“合法化危机”，但机构却享受着深化的“优惠赞助”——财务和声誉优势。二战后，大学带领国家在竞争激烈的欧洲和全球科学体系中重新建立了科学地位。但是对科学、技术、工程、数学、和医学与健康期刊出版物（1950-2010）发现，德国的中小型独立研究机构做出了显着的、不断增长的贡献，尤其是在影响较大的期刊上发表的文章比例超过了它们的规模。同时——尽管存在双重支柱政策影响——大学部门继续绝对和相对成功；没有被研究所黯然失色。至少自 1980 年以来，大学一直在最高质量的期刊上发表全国三分之二的出版物，并且以对数速度增加出版物；高于国际平均水平。事实上，他们带领德国进入了全球超级科学的生产方式。与功能分化的假设好处相反，我们的结果表明，相对于它们的大小，每个部门都产生了大致相似的出版记录。虽然研究所取得了成功，但更大的大学部门尽管资金增长少得多，但仍然是德国科学生产的基础。考虑到这些发现，我们讨论了双支柱政策的未来效用。