Summary

Our analysis shows that:

• The size of the funding pool (which includes research top-ups and PBRF allocations) has tripled in nominal terms and more than doubled in real terms between 2000 and 2019.
• The phase-in of the PBRF saw a shift of funding away from non-university tertiary education organisations (TEOs) to the universities. With the dominance of the universities in terms of the number of research degree completions and amount of external research income attracted by TEOs, a shift towards  the universities was expected. Non-participation in the PBRF by non-university TEOs was also a contributing factor. Although all universities have received increased funding in real terms over time, non-university TEOs are only just approaching the same levels of real funding seen during the research  top-ups period.
• The two universities to show a consistent increase in the share of PBRF funding since 2007 were Auckland University of Technology and Victoria University of Wellington.
• The PBRF research degree completions component has exhibited the largest variation in the share of funding earned by universities and non-university sub-sectors.
• Although the size of the PBRF has increased significantly, it has not increased by enough to maintain the funding per point that existed in 2007, the first full year of PBRF allocations. The increased number of staff with funded quality categories in the Quality Evaluations and the increased number  of research degree completions has outpaced increases in PBRF funding.
• Despite the decrease in funding per point, there were still substantial incentives for a TEO to maximise research quality in order to maximise share of the funding pool. Also, the publication of the Quality Evaluation results creates a significant reputational incentive for TEOs.