IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v41y2012i8p1448-1460.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies: Beggars cannot be choosers?

Author

Listed:
  • Grimpe, Christoph

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Grimpe, Christoph, 2012. "Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies: Beggars cannot be choosers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1448-1460.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:8:p:1448-1460
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733312000649
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.004?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. 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.
    2. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 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.
    3. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    4. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:06 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2009. "Professional guilds, tension and knowledge management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 736-745, June.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. David B. Audretsch & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Public/private technology partnerships: evaluating SBIR-supported research," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 5, pages 91-104, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Ashish Arora & Alfonso Gambardella, 2010. "The Impact of NSF Support for Basic Research in Economics," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 91-115, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Hussinger, Katrin, 2009. "Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 26-34, February.
    17. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    18. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
    22. Bolli, Thomas & Somogyi, Frank, 2011. "Do competitively acquired funds induce universities to increase productivity?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 136-147, February.
    23. Athey, Susan. & Stern, Scott, 1969-, 1998. "An empirical framework for testing theories about complementarity in orgaziational design," Working papers WP 4022-98., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    24. Ulrich Schmoch & Torben Schubert, 2009. "Sustainability of incentives for excellent research — The German case," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 195-218, October.
    25. 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.
    26. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    27. 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.
    28. 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.
    29. 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.
    30. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    31. Ashish Arora & Paul David & Alfonso Gambardella, 1998. "Reputation and Competence in Publicly Funded Science: Estimating the Effects on Research Group Productivity," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 163-198.
    32. 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.
    33. 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.
    34. repec:adr:anecst:y:2005:i:79-80:p:04 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Aschhoff, Birgit & Grimpe, Christoph, 2014. "Contemporaneous peer effects, career age and the industry involvement of academics in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 367-381.
    2. 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.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    4. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Lim, Kwanghui & Soh, Pek-Hooi, 2013. "When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 595-612.
    5. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    6. Soh, Pek-Hooi & Subramanian, Annapoornima M., 2014. "When do firms benefit from university–industry R&D collaborations? The implications of firm R&D focus on scientific research and technological recombination," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 807-821.
    7. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén & Christoph Grimpe, 2017. "Who instigates university–industry collaborations? University scientists versus firm employees," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 503-524, March.
    8. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    9. Blind, Knut & Krieger, Bastian & Pellens, Maikel, 2022. "The interplay between product innovation, publishing, patenting and developing standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    10. Hottenrott, Hanna & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2010. "Industry funding of university research and scientific productivity," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-105, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    12. Jong, Simcha & Slavova, Kremena, 2014. "When publications lead to products: The open science conundrum in new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 645-654.
    13. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castillo, 2019. "Funding academic research: grant application, partnership, award, and output," Economics Working Papers 1658, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    14. Dirk Czarnitzki & Christian Rammer & Andrew Toole, 2014. "University spin-offs and the “performance premium”," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 309-326, August.
    15. Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2008. "Formal and Informal Technology Transfer from Academia to Industry: Complementarity Effects and Innovation Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-080, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Rajeev Goel & Christoph Grimpe, 2013. "Active versus passive academic networking: evidence from micro-level data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 116-134, April.
    17. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    18. Alessandra Scandura, 2019. "The role of scientific and market knowledge in the inventive process: evidence from a survey of industrial inventors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1029-1069, August.
    19. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Rachel Levy & Pascale Roux & Sandrine Wolff, 2009. "An analysis of science–industry collaborative patterns in a large European University," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research funding; Scientist productivity; Sixth Framework Programme;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:8:p:1448-1460. 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/respol .

    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.