IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v16y2007i1p13-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing a proposal review process to facilitate interdisciplinary research

Author

Listed:
  • Kazuyoshi Shimada
  • Mitsuo Akagi
  • Tohru Kazamaki
  • Shinichi Kobayashi

Abstract

This paper introduces a novel proposal review process to facilitate interdisciplinary research. This method provides not only for competition for a grant, but also for collaboration among applicants. Applicants can refine their research proposals through a workshop discussion held during the proposal review process. This presents an opportunity for applicants to obtain feedback based on a broad range of viewpoints from people with various expertise. The method has actually been applied to the proposal review process in science and engineering fields (Takeda Techno-Entrepreneurship Award, 2001, 2002). Its feasibility and some of the merits found are discussed. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Kazuyoshi Shimada & Mitsuo Akagi & Tohru Kazamaki & Shinichi Kobayashi, 2007. "Designing a proposal review process to facilitate interdisciplinary research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 13-21, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:16:y:2007:i:1:p:13-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/095820207X190647
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to 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:oup:rseval:v:16:y:2007:i:1:p:13-21. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.