IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ecorec/v77y2001i237p183-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economists and the ARC Large Grants Scheme: A Brief Report

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah Fretz
  • Michael R. Veall

Abstract

We examine awards to economics in recent years under the Australian Research Council (ARC) Large Grants Scheme and speculate briefly on the effects of the new National Competitive Grants Programme. The primary determinant of number of awards by panel is number of applications. While no ARC rule guarantees panels will preserve success‐to‐application ratios by discipline, this seems a good approximation for economics and many other Social Science panel disciplines, though limited evidence suggests economics assessors give somewhat lower scores. Economics ARC award rates per staff member resemble those in other social sciences but are significantly smaller than those in philosophy, history, biology and chemistry.

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah Fretz & Michael R. Veall, 2001. "Economists and the ARC Large Grants Scheme: A Brief Report," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(237), pages 183-188, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ecorec:v:77:y:2001:i:237:p:183-188
    DOI: 10.1111/1475-4932.00013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4932.00013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1475-4932.00013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lonnie Magee & Michael R. Veall, 2002. "Allocating Awards Across Noncomparable Categories," Department of Economics Working Papers 2002-11, McMaster University.
    2. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ecorec:v:77:y:2001:i:237:p:183-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esausea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.