IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v43y2014icp105-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach

Author

Listed:
  • Bloch, Carter
  • Sørensen, Mads P.
  • Graversen, Ebbe K.
  • Schneider, Jesper W.
  • Schmidt, Evanthia Kalpazidou
  • Aagaard, Kaare
  • Mejlgaard, Niels

Abstract

This paper discusses the development of a mixed methods approach to analyse research funding. Research policy has taken on an increasingly prominent role in the broader political scene, where research is seen as a critical factor in maintaining and improving growth, welfare and international competitiveness. This has motivated growing emphasis on the impacts of science funding, and how funding can best be designed to promote socio-economic progress. Meeting these demands for impact assessment involves a number of complex issues that are difficult to fully address in a single study or in the design of a single methodology. However, they point to some general principles that can be explored in methodological design. We draw on a recent evaluation of the impacts of research grant funding, discussing both key issues in developing a methodology for the analysis and subsequent results. The case of research grant funding, involving a complex mix of direct and intermediate effects that contribute to the overall impact of funding on research performance, illustrates the value of a mixed methods approach to provide a more robust and complete analysis of policy impacts. Reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology are used to examine refinements for future work.

Suggested Citation

  • Bloch, Carter & Sørensen, Mads P. & Graversen, Ebbe K. & Schneider, Jesper W. & Schmidt, Evanthia Kalpazidou & Aagaard, Kaare & Mejlgaard, Niels, 2014. "Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 105-117.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:105-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718913001092
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.12.005?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benavente, José Miguel & Crespi, Gustavo & Figal Garone, Lucas & Maffioli, Alessandro, 2012. "The impact of national research funds: A regression discontinuity approach to the Chilean FONDECYT," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1461-1475.
    2. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    3. Jeffrey L. Furman & Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2012. "Growing Stem Cells: The Impact of Federal Funding Policy on the U.S. Scientific Frontier," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 661-705, June.
    4. Nancy Leech & Anthony Onwuegbuzie, 2009. "A typology of mixed methods research designs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 265-275, March.
    5. Ubfal, Diego & Maffioli, Alessandro, 2010. "The Impact of Funding on Research Collaboration: Evidence from Argentina," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2663, Inter-American Development Bank.
    6. Adam B. Jaffe, 2002. "Building Programme Evaluation into the Design of Public Research-Support Programmes," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(1), pages 22-34, Spring.
    7. James J. Heckman, 2001. "Micro Data, Heterogeneity, and the Evaluation of Public Policy: Nobel Lecture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(4), pages 673-748, August.
    8. Jacob, Brian A. & Lefgren, Lars, 2011. "The impact of NIH postdoctoral training grants on scientific productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 864-874, July.
    9. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    10. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    11. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    12. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    13. Irwin Feller, 2007. "Mapping the frontiers of evaluation of public-sector R&D programs," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(10), pages 681-690, December.
    14. Daniel Chudnovsky & Andrés López & Martín A. Rossi & Diego Ubfal, 2008. "Money for Science? The Impact of Research Grants on Academic Output," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 75-87, March.
    15. Ubfal, Diego & Maffioli, Alessandro, 2011. "The impact of funding on research collaboration: Evidence from a developing country," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1269-1279.
    16. Georghiou, Luke & Roessner, David, 2000. "Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 657-678, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mohammed R. AlShareef & Ibrahim A. Alrammah & Nasser A. Alshoukani & Abdulaziz M. Almalik, 2023. "The impact of financial incentives on research production: Evidence from Saudi Arabia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 3067-3089, May.
    2. Yim, Moonjung & Fellows, Michelle & Coward, Chris, 2020. "Mixed-methods library evaluation integrating the patron, library, and external perspectives: The case of Namibia regional libraries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Álvarez-Bornstein, Belén & Bordons, María, 2021. "Is funding related to higher research impact? Exploring its relationship and the mediating role of collaboration in several disciplines," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    4. Gill, Chelsea & Mehrotra, Vishal & Moses, Olayinka & Bui, Binh, 2023. "The impact of the pitching research framework on AFAANZ grant applications," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Nosi, Costanza & D’Agostino, Antonella & Pratesi, Carlo Alberto & Barbarossa, Camilla, 2021. "Evaluating a social marketing campaign on healthy nutrition and lifestyle among primary-school children: A mixed-method research design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Kyoungmi Lee & Sunglok Choi & Jae-Suk Yang, 2021. "Can expensive research equipment boost research and development performances?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7715-7742, September.
    7. Klaudia Bracio & Marek Szarucki, 2020. "Mixed Methods Utilisation in Innovation Management Research: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Summary," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-27, October.
    8. Pelucha, Martin & Kveton, Viktor & Potluka, Oto, 2019. "Using mixed method approach in measuring effects of training in firms: Case study of the European Social Fund support," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 146-155.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benavente, José Miguel & Crespi, Gustavo & Figal Garone, Lucas & Maffioli, Alessandro, 2012. "The impact of national research funds: A regression discontinuity approach to the Chilean FONDECYT," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1461-1475.
    2. Jeffrey Smith & Arthur Sweetman, 2016. "Viewpoint: Estimating the causal effects of policies and programs," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 871-905, August.
    3. ONISHI Koichiro & OWAN Hideo, 2020. "Heterogenous Impacts of National Research Grants on Academic Productivity," Discussion papers 20052, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. Aboal, Diego & Tacsir, Ezequiel, 2016. "The impact of ex-ante subsidies to researchers on researcher's productivity: Evidence from a developing country," MERIT Working Papers 2016-019, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    6. Eliasson, Kent, 2006. "The Role of Ability in Estimating the Returns to College Choice: New Swedish Evidence," Umeå Economic Studies 691, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    7. Luca Grilli & Samuele Murtinu, 2011. "Econometric Evaluation of Public Policies for Science and Innovation: A Brief Guide to Practice," Chapters, in: Massimo G. Colombo & Luca Grilli & Lucia Piscitello & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra (ed.), Science and Innovation Policy for the New Knowledge Economy, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Davis, K. & Nkonya, E. & Kato, E. & Mekonnen, D.A. & Odendo, M. & Miiro, R. & Nkuba, J., 2012. "Impact of Farmer Field Schools on Agricultural Productivity and Poverty in East Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 402-413.
    9. Nkonya, Ephraim & Phillip, Dayo & Mogues, Tewodaj & Pender, John & Yahaya, Muhammed Kuta & Adebowale, Gbenga & Arokoyo, Tunji & Kato, Edward, 2008. "From the ground up: Impacts of a pro-poor community-driven development project in Nigeria," IFPRI discussion papers 756, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Jaud, Melise & Cadot, Olivier, 2012. "A second look at the pesticides initiative program: evidence from Senegal," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 490-506, July.
    11. Daniel Chudnovsky & Andrés López & Martín Rossi & Diego Ubfal, 2006. "Evaluating a Program of Public Funding of Scientific Activity. A Case Study of FONCYT in Argentina," OVE Working Papers 1206, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
    12. Gurgen Ohanyan & Armenia Androniceanu, 2017. "Evaluation of IMF Programmes on Employment in the EU," Acta Oeconomica, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 67(3), pages 311-332, September.
    13. Christian Durán, 2004. "Evaluación microeconométrica de las políticas públicas de empleo: aspectos metodológicos," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 170(3), pages 107-133, september.
    14. Heshmati, Almas & Loof, Hans, 2005. "The Impact of Public Funds on Private R&D Investment: New Evidence from a Firm Level Innovation Study," Discussion Papers 11862, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
    15. Martey, Edward & Kuwornu, John K.M. & Adjebeng-Danquah, Joseph, 2019. "Estimating the effect of mineral fertilizer use on Land productivity and income: Evidence from Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 463-475.
    16. Roberto Gabriele & Marco Zamarian & Enrico Zaninotto, 2006. "Assessing the economic impact of public industrial policies: an empirical investigation on subsidies," ROCK Working Papers 039, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 12 Jun 2008.
    17. Jose C. Galdo & Jeffrey Smith & Dan Black, 2008. "Bandwidth Selection and the Estimation of Treatment Effects with Unbalanced Data," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 91-92, pages 189-216.
    18. Alm, Bastian & Bade, Franz-Josef, 2009. "The impact of firm subsidies: Evaluating German regional policy," EconStor Preprints 103402, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2017. "Fishing for complementarities: Research grants and research productivity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-38.
    20. Spitz, Alexandra, 2004. "Using Methods of Treatment Evaluation to Estimate the Wage Effect of IT Usage," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-67, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:eee:epplan:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:105-117. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.