Focal Randomization: An optimal mechanism for the evaluation of R&D
AbstractIn most countries, governments intervene in the process of R&D by financing a substantial part of it. The mechanism employed for choosing the projects to be financed is a committee composed of experts who evaluate projects in their field of specialization, and decide which ones should be funded. This mechanism for evaluating projects is conservative. Proposals of new ideas are too often rejected, and inventions are commonly thrown out of the set of potential projects. In this paper, I propose a mechanism that will allow less conformity: focal randomization. Focal randomization mechanism (FRM) states that projects which are unanimously ranked at the top by all reviewers, will be adopted. Projects perceived as valueless by all are rejected, while projects that are ranked differently will be randomized. I compare the average return under the present and proposed mechanism. I examine under which conditions this new mechanism is preferable, and its consequences on economic growth.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade in its series DEGIT Conference Papers with number c011_035.
Length: 18 pages JEL Classification:
Date of creation: Jun 2006
Date of revision:
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2006-12-01 (All new papers)
- NEP-INO-2006-12-01 (Innovation)
- NEP-PPM-2006-12-01 (Project, Program & Portfolio Management)
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.:
- M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Adam B. Jaffe, 2002. "Building Programme Evaluation into the Design of Public Research-Support Programmes," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 22-34, Spring.
- Nestor Duch-Brown & Jose Garcia-Quevedo & Daniel Montolio, 2008.
"Assessing the assignation of public subsidies: Do the experts choose the most efficient R&D projects?,"
Working Papers in Economics
207, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia.
- Néstor Duch-Brown & José García-Quevedo & Daniel Montolio, 2008. "Assessing the assignation of public subsidies: Do the experts choose the most efficient R&D projects?," Working Papers 2008/5, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
- Nestor Duch-Brown & José García-Quevedo & Daniel Montolio, 2008. "Assessing the assignation of public subsidies: Do the experts choose the most efficient R&D projects?," Working Papers XREAP2008-12, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised Nov 2008.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michaela Rank).
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.