IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/stanec/97039.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economics of University Indirect Cost Reimbursement in Federal Research Grants

Author

Listed:
  • Roger G. Noll
  • William P. Rogerson

Abstract

The federal government has been the most important source of funds for academic research since the 1950s. Nearly a third of this support takes the form of indirect cost recovery (overhead). Long a source of conflict between universities and the government, in recent years the indirect cost controversy has escalated, with most research universities intensively investigated for alleged abuses. This essay examines the nature of indirect costs and the sources of the conflicts about them. The main argument is that the types of costs that are covered by overhead charges must be paid for the research intensity of universities to be retained; however, the existing system for reimbursing these costs creates unnecessary distortions in the operation of universities and has very high transactions costs. Instead, both universities and the federal government would be better off if the existing indirect cost reimbursement system were replaced by a system of fixed reimbursement rates that were not related to a university's actual indirect costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger G. Noll & William P. Rogerson, "undated". "The Economics of University Indirect Cost Reimbursement in Federal Research Grants," Working Papers 97039, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:stanec:97039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-econ.stanford.edu/faculty/workp/swp97039.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lowry, Robert C., 2001. "The effects of state political interests and campus outputs on public university revenues," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 105-119, April.
    2. Tyler Cowen & Alex Tabarrok, 2016. "A Skeptical View of the National Science Foundation's Role in Economic Research," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 235-248, Summer.

    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:wop:stanec:97039. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/destaus.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.