Does It Pay to Do Novel Science? The Selectivity Patterns in Science Funding
Michele Pezzoni and
Science and Public Policy, 2021, vol. 48, issue 5, 635-648
Public funding agencies aim to fund novel breakthrough research to promote the radical scientific discoveries of tomorrow. Identifying the profiles of scientists being financed to pursue their research is therefore crucial. This paper shows that the funding process is not always awarding the most novel scientists. Exploiting rich data on all applications to a leading Swiss research funding program, we find that novel scientists have a higher probability of applying for funds than non-novel scientists, but they get on average lower ratings by grant evaluators and have fewer chances of being funded. We discuss the implications for the allocation of scientific research spending.
Keywords: public funding; scientific research; novelty; selectivity; research evaluation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I23 O38 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
Working Paper: Does it Pay to Do Novel Science? The Selectivity Patterns in Science Funding (2019)
Working Paper: Does it pay to do novel science? The selectivity patterns in science funding (2019)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:scippl:v:48:y:2021:i:5:p:635-648.
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Science and Public Policy from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().