IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v27y2001i1p95-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Organize Science Funding: The New Canadian Institutes for Health Research, an Opportunity to Increase Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Bryan J. Poulin
  • Richard Gordon

Abstract

Why are Bell, 3M and the intramural program at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) so successful at inspiring innovation? How does the Medical Research Council of Canada (MRC) compare and conflict with innovation in these examples? Will the existing and proposed structure and culture of the new Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), which are replacing MRC, produce relatively little innovation from the outset? Our examination leads to recomendations for an alternative funding system and organizational structure for CIHR: minimal structure with baseline funding at the initial, idea stage (40 percent of budget); more formal structure and competitive funding at the feasibility stage (50 percent); and matching industrial grants for the commercialization stage (10 percent). Our alternative CIHR budget would permit baseline grants of approximately $20,000/year for each of 10,000 qualified medical investigators, 8,000 more than presently funded.

Suggested Citation

  • Bryan J. Poulin & Richard Gordon, 2001. "How to Organize Science Funding: The New Canadian Institutes for Health Research, an Opportunity to Increase Innovation," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 27(1), pages 95-111, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:27:y:2001:i:1:p:95-111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0317-0861%28200103%2927%3A1%3C95%3AHTOSFT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:cpp:issued:v:27:y:2001:i:1:p:95-111. 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: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    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.