But the author of the article actually conflates research and economical growth. That's why I was discussing the problems that come up when you only focus on economic growth.

What? It looks to me like the article is focusing almost exclusively on research, not on economic growth. There's some stuff in the first two paragraphs about setting the economic context, and a passing mention much later of academic inequality seeming to produce a corresponding economic inequality, but as far as I can tell, the main thrust of his point is very much focused on the research side and independent from anything it means on the economic side. Where is he talking in any depth about economics?