Research calls, competition for funding and inefficiency

António Osório and Lutz Bornmann

Research Evaluation, 2022, vol. 31, issue 3, 289-296

Abstract: Research groups spend time and resources in the process of applying for funding. This issue raises important questions regarding inefficiency and whether the currently used funding mechanisms are adequate. This article aims to identify ways of reducing the inefficiency and the waste of resources when making research funding calls. We look at four ways of reducing inefficiency. Inefficiency decreases when: (1) the most productive research groups are favoured over the less productive ones, (2) the call is restricted to a small number of research groups actively working on the subject of the call, (3) the funding process is less dependent on the amount of effort spent on fund-seeking activities by the research groups, and (4) the number of research groups competing in the same call is small. However, not all these mechanisms are equally powerful or easy to implement. Our results suggest that (1) reducing the dependence of the funding process on funding activities’ efforts, or (2) reducing the number of research groups by narrowing the subject of the call to groups that are very active in the call’s subject might be particularly effective in reducing inefficiency.

Keywords: research funding; funding competition; random funding; inefficiency (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvac007 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:rseval:v:31:y:2022:i:3:p:289-296.

Access Statistics for this article

Research Evaluation is currently edited by Julia Melkers, Emanuela Reale and Thed van Leeuwen

More articles in Research Evaluation from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().