IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i17p6891-d403618.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Distribution of Research Grants Sustainable? An Empirical Study of Grant Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Bączkiewicz

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Jakub Dagil

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Bartłomiej Kizielewicz

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Karol Urbaniak

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Wojciech Sałabun

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

Financing of basic research is an important task in supporting research activities and development of dynamically advancing interdisciplinary fields of science. A significant challenge in this aspect is the correct distribution of limited finances sustainably. In this paper, we present an empirical study related to National Science Centre (NSC), which is the main government agency in Poland. NSC funds projects in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, Life Sciences and Physical Sciences and Engineering. In this work, we analyse three primary funding schemes of NSC, which are called PRELUDIUM, SONATA and OPUS. Each of theses programms is asigned to another group of scientists from beginners to experts. Projects’ data concerning PRELUDIUM, SONATA and OPUS schemes are collected from NSC projects database (only completed projects) and proccessed for further investigation. Effectiveness and sustainability of projects implemented in scientific fields are analysed concerning criteria such as the total number of book publications, papers, amount of grants and IF points. The results obtained are presented regarding scientific disciplines and panels. Prevailingly, the PRELUDIUM scheme exhibits better results in the majority of criteria and panels.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Bączkiewicz & Jakub Dagil & Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Karol Urbaniak & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Is the Distribution of Research Grants Sustainable? An Empirical Study of Grant Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-59, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:17:p:6891-:d:403618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/6891/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/6891/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loet Leydesdorff & Tobias Opthof, 2010. "Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(11), pages 2365-2369, November.
    2. Yoshiko Okubo, 1997. "Bibliometric Indicators and Analysis of Research Systems: Methods and Examples," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/1, OECD Publishing.
    3. Terttu Luukkonen, 2014. "The European Research Council and the European research funding landscape," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 29-43.
    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. Abbas Abdul, 2023. "Policy seduction and governance resistance? Examining public funding agencies and academic institutions on decarbonisation research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 87-101.

    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. Noushin Islam & Malindu Sandanayake & Shobha Muthukumaran & Dimuth Navaratna, 2024. "Review on Sustainable Construction and Demolition Waste Management—Challenges and Research Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-30, April.
    2. Peter Sjögårde & Fereshteh Didegah, 2022. "The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1903-1921, April.
    3. Yun-Wen Chuang & Ling-Chu Lee & Wen-Chi Hung & Pin-Hua Lin, 2010. "Forging Into The Innovation Lead — A Comparative Analysis Of Scientific Capacity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 511-529.
    4. Magdalena Olczyk, 2016. "International Competitiveness in the Economics Literature: A Bibliometric Study," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 2(4), pages 375-388, October.
    5. Han, Yoo-Jin, 2007. "Measuring industrial knowledge stocks with patents and papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 269-276.
    6. René Lezama-Nicolás & Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador & Rosa Río-Belver & Iñaki Bildosola, 2018. "A bibliometric method for assessing technological maturity: the case of additive manufacturing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1425-1452, December.
    7. Jerome K. Vanclay, 2012. "Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 211-238, August.
    8. Jacqueline Veneroso Alves da Cunha & Edgard Bruno Cornachione Jr. & Gilberto de Andrade Martins, 2010. "Accounting Sciences theses: an analysis of their dissemination," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 7(3), pages 45-63, September.
    9. Okubo, Yoshiko & Sjoberg, Cecilia, 2000. "The changing pattern of industrial scientific research collaboration in Sweden," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 81-98, January.
    10. Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2012. "Skewed citation distributions and bias factors: Solutions to two core problems with the journal impact factor," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 169-176.
    11. Wolfgang Glänzel & Henk F. Moed, 2013. "Opinion paper: thoughts and facts on bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 381-394, July.
    12. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2014. "Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1897-1924, December.
    13. Cristiano Varin & Manuela Cattelan & David Firth, 2016. "Statistical modelling of citation exchange between statistics journals," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 179(1), pages 1-63, January.
    14. Mingkun Wei, 2020. "Research on impact evaluation of open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1027-1049, February.
    15. Hiep-Hung Pham & Thi-Kieu-Trang Dong & Quan-Hoang Vuong & Dinh-Hai Luong & Tien-Trung Nguyen & Viet-Hung Dinh & Manh-Tung Ho, 2021. "A bibliometric review of research on international student mobilities in Asia with Scopus dataset between 1984 and 2019," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5201-5224, June.
    16. Lehmann, Robert & Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2017. "Who is the ‘Journal Grand Master’? A new ranking based on the Elo rating system," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 800-809.
    17. Toshiyuki Hasumi & Mei-Shiu Chiu, 2022. "Online mathematics education as bio-eco-techno process: bibliometric analysis using co-authorship and bibliographic coupling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4631-4654, August.
    18. Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert & Bart Thijs & Koenraad Debackere, 2011. "A priori vs. a posteriori normalisation of citation indicators. The case of journal ranking," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 415-424, May.
    19. Mike Danilovic & Marleen Hensbergen & Maya Hoveskog & Liudmila Zadayannaya, 2015. "Exploring Diffusion and Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 129-141, May.
    20. Seiler, Christian & Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2014. "How robust are journal rankings based on the impact factor? Evidence from the economic sciences," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 904-911.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:17:p:6891-:d:403618. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.