Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Up or out? How individual research grants affect academic careers in the Netherlands

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sander Gerritsen

    ()

  • Karen van der Wiel

    ()

  • Erik Plug (UVA)

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of obtaining an individual research grant (Vernieuwingsimpuls or IRI -grant) on the careers of Dutch scientists. The main goal of this scheme of the Dutch Research Council is to provide relatively young, talented scientists with appealing career opportunities in academia. We find that the receipt of an IRI-grant enhances the probability of a successful career in science. Read also: CPB Discussion Paper 248 We evaluate the causal effect of an IRI-grant on labor-market outcomes by taking advantage of the discontinuity in the relationship between the priority scores given to each application and the actual receipt of a grant. Six years after application, grant recipients are more likely to stay in academia (six percentage points), more likely to be a full professor (seven percentage points) and more likely to receive future grants (five percentage points). However, grant receipt does not yield higher wages. Apparently IRI-grantees are purely rewarded for winning a grant in terms of the opportunity to do their self-selected research. It seems likely that this free research time is combined with a lower teaching load. In addition, we find that successful applicants are not rewarded in terms of their contract type either. Six years after application, the probability to work on a permanent contract is ten percentage points smaller for the successful applicants. This is not only driven by those applicants leaving academia for a sector in which permanent contracts are more customary. Also within the large group of applicants who stay in academia, those who win an IRI-grant are less likely to have obtained a permanent contract. This academic discussion paper is an example of CPB’s research on science policy. Another discussion paper is published simultaneously on the effects of STW-grants on scientific productivity and utilization ( CPB Discussion Paper 248 ).

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/cpb-discussion-paper-249-or-out-how-individual-research-grants-affect-academic-careers-netherlands.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis in its series CPB Discussion Paper with number 249.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Jul 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:249

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Postbus 80510, 2508 GM Den Haag
Phone: (070) 338 33 80
Fax: (070) 338 33 50
Email:
Web page: http://www.cpb.nl/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Brian Jacob & Lars Lefgren, 2007. "The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity," NBER Working Papers 13519, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Jacob, Brian A. & Lefgren, Lars, 2011. "The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1168-1177.
  3. Stephanie Riegg Cellini & Fernando Ferreira & Jesse Rothstein, 2010. "The Value of School Facility Investments: Evidence from a Dynamic Regression Discontinuity Design," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 125(1), pages 215-261, February.
  4. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. & Imbens, Guido, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Scholarly Articles 3043416, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  5. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent & Visser, Michael, 2008. "Publish or peer-rich? The role of skills and networks in hiring economics professors," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 423-441, June.
  6. Michele Pezzoni & Valerio Sterzi & Francesco Lissoni, 2009. "Career progress in centralized academic systems: social capital and institutions in France and Italy," KITeS Working Papers 026, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised 2009.
  7. Angrist, Joshua & Rokkanen, Miikka, 2013. "Wanna Get Away? RD Identification Away from the Cutoff," IZA Discussion Papers 7429, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  8. Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet & Van den Besselaar, Peter, 2010. "A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: Different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 211-220.
  9. Paula E. Stephan, 2010. "The Economics of Science - Funding for Research," ICER Working Papers 12-2010, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
  10. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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