SciVal Metric: Field-Normalized Policy Impact (FNPI)

Field-Normalized Policy Impact (FNPI) in SciVal indicates how the share of an entity’s publications cited in policy documents compares with the world average for similar publications. The metric helps you understand whether an entity’s research is cited in policy documents more or less often than expected, while accounting for differences in publication year, document type, and subject area.

Methodology:

Field-Normalized Policy Impact measures the normalized share of publications that have been cited in policy documents. In practice, it is calculated as the entity’s share of policy-cited publications divided by the share expected for similar publications worldwide, so the result is a ratio relative to the world average.

A publication is counted using a binary approach:

• Cited in at least one policy document = counted as cited
• Not cited in any policy document = counted as not cited

The number of policy citations received by a publication does not affect the calculation. A publication cited once and a publication cited many times are treated equally in the metric calculation.

The metric compares an entity’s share of policy-cited publications with the world average for publications that share the same:

• Publication year
• Document type
• Subject area

This normalization helps make fairer comparisons across disciplines and publication types, where policy citation behavior can vary.

A Field-Normalized Policy Impact value of:

• 1.00 indicates that the entity performs exactly at the world average
• More than 1.00 indicates that the entity’s publications are cited in policy documents more often than expected
• Less than 1.00 indicates that the entity’s publications are cited in policy documents less often than expected

For example:

• An FNPI of 1.40 means publications are cited in policy documents 40% more often than the world average for similar publications
• An FNPI of 0.75 means publications are cited in policy documents 25% less often than the world average

Why does the metric use a binary approach?

Policy citations are relatively rare compared with scholarly citations. A small number of publications with unusually high policy citation counts can heavily influence citation-count-based indicators.

To reduce the impact of these outliers, Field-Normalized Policy Impact uses whether a publication was cited in policy documents at all, rather than how many times it was cited. This provides a more stable and interpretable indicator of policy impact across entities and disciplines.

Is there a time window for policy citations?

There is no fixed time window for policy citations. All policy citations a publication has received are counted, regardless of when they occurred. When Field-Normalized Policy Impact is shown in a chart or table by year, those years are the years in which the items were published, not the years in which policy citations were received.

How is Field-Normalized Policy Impact different from other policy metrics?

Field-Normalized Policy Impact complements existing policy metrics in SciVal by focusing on normalized policy impact rather than raw counts.

Other policy metrics in SciVal report raw counts, such as Scholarly Output cited by Policy, Policy Citations, Citing Policy Documents, Citing Policy Bodies, and Citing Policy Body Countries. Learn more about policy metrics.

The metric is designed to help answer questions such as:

• Are this institution’s publications cited in policy documents more often than expected?
• How does policy impact compare across entities working in different research fields?
• Is policy impact above or below the world benchmark?

Availability

Field-Normalized Policy Impact is available:

• On the Policy Impact page in Explore
• In Compare under All Metrics

The metric is available for:

• All entity types for customers with access to SciVal Impact
• Institution entities for customers with access to Overview and Benchmarking (not Impact)

Additional considerations

Be careful when interpreting the metric for entities with a small number of publications. Because policy citations are relatively uncommon, results for small publication sets may vary more strongly year to year.

Policy citation data should be considered alongside other quantitative and qualitative evidence when evaluating broader research impact.