Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies: Beggars cannot be choosers?
Although competitive funding of public research has been characterised as providing output incentives that raise efficiency and productivity, we know very little about whether the quality of a scientist's research is in fact the primary award criterion on which funding bodies base their grant decision. This paper provides insights into scientists’ strategies for obtaining project-based research funding in the presence of multiple funding opportunities. It draws a distinction between four types of grants, including the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP6), government, foundation, and industry grants. Based on a sample of more than 800 scientists at universities and public research institutes in Germany, the results indicate that scientist productivity measured in terms of publication and patent stock is a statistically significant determinant only for obtaining foundation and industry grants while the award of an FP6 or government grant is influenced by other characteristics. The results further show that the different grants are not complementary, i.e. scientists specialise in certain grants. In this respect, the analysis informs science, technology and innovation policy about potential discrepancies between policy rhetoric, stipulated award criteria, and actual funding outcomes which makes it possible to fine-tune the debate on how public research should be financed.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- James D. Adams, 2004.
"Scientific Teams and Institution Collaborations: Evidence from U.S. Universities, 1981-1999,"
NBER Working Papers
10640, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Adams, James D. & Black, Grant C. & Clemmons, J. Roger & Stephan, Paula E., 2005. "Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 259-285, April.
- Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
- Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2009. "Professional guilds, tension and knowledge management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 736-745, June.
- repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:06 is not listed on IDEAS
- Viner, Neil & Powell, Philip & Green, Rod, 2004. "Institutionalized biases in the award of research grants: a preliminary analysis revisiting the principle of accumulative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 443-454, April.
- Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2007. "Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers' interactions with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 694-707, June.
- Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff S. Armstrong, 2002.
"Commercializing Knowledge: University Science, Knowledge Capture, and Firm Performance in Biotechnology,"
INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 138-153, January.
- Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff S. Armstrong, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
- Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff S. Armstrong, 2001. "Commercializing Knowledge: University Science, Knowledge Capture, and Firm Performance in Biotechnology," NBER Working Papers 8499, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
- Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
- David B. Audretsch & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013.
"Public/private technology partnerships: evaluating SBIR-supported research,"
in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 5, pages 91-104
Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Audretsch, David B. & Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2002. "Public/private technology partnerships: evaluating SBIR-supported research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 145-158, January.
- Defazio, Daniela & Lockett, Andy & Wright, Mike, 2009. "Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 293-305, March.
- Elizabeth Corley & Monica Gaughan, 2005. "Scientists’ Participation in University Research Centers: What are the Gender Differences?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 371-381, October.
- Christoph Grimpe & Heide Fier, 2010.
"Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany,"
The Journal of Technology Transfer,
Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 637-650, December.
- Grimpe, Christoph & Fier, Heide, 2009. "Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-033, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Czarnitzki, Dirk & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Hussinger, Katrin, 2009.
"Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research,"
Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 26-34, February.
- Czarnitzki, Dirk & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Hussinger, Katrin, 2007. "Heterogeneity of Patenting Activity and Its Implications for Scientific Research," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-028, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Paula E. Stephan, 1996.
"The Economics of Science,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1199-1235, September.
- Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
- Susan Athey & Scott Stern, 1998. "An Empirical Framework for Testing Theories About Complimentarity in Organizational Design," NBER Working Papers 6600, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
- Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
- Bolli, Thomas & Somogyi, Frank, 2011. "Do competitively acquired funds induce universities to increase productivity?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 136-147, February.
- Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2005. "Universities as partners in U.S. research joint ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 385-393, April.
- Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
- Marin, Pedro L. & Siotis, Georges, 2008. "Public policies towards Research Joint Venture: Institutional design and participants' characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1057-1065, July.
- Edler, Jakob & Fier, Heide & Grimpe, Christoph, 2011. "International scientist mobility and the locus of knowledge and technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 791-805, July.
- Luukkonen, Terttu, 2002. "Technology and market orientation in company participation in the EU framework programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 437-455, March.
- Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
- Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
- Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
- repec:adr:anecst:y:2005:i:79-80:p:04 is not listed on IDEAS
- Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:8:p:1448-1460. 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: (Dana Niculescu)
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.