Excellent prospects: arguing ‘value-added’ in research excellence proposals

Research excellence instruments (REIs) are among the most popular types of research funding in several research systems, including the Global South. A significant proportion of REIs is intended to promote pathbreaking or groundbreaking contributions. Specific research outcomes can often be traced back to a given project’s scientific objectives, but projections about the impact on the field and the broader scientific community require the researcher to engage in more speculative estimates. This paper takes its rationale from the assumption that such projections are sources of insight into researchers’ perspectives on the field significance of their research agenda. Consequently, they reveal the broader impact landscape of scientists who receive such funding, and hint at potential social implications, a concern that dominates extant research on impact. This study focused on the ‘value-added’ to the field projections in successful applications for the Swedish distinguished professor’s grant (DPG), a unique variant of REIs that targets individuals rather than the more commonly studied Centers of Excellence (CoEs). We categorize the value-added statements made in these applications into a typology based on their logical structure, distinguishing between intermediate and final values. We use a logic model analysis of these statements to uncover a series of cause-and-effect projections tied to research funding. Our study also sheds light on accepted preconceived notions of field impact and the pathways to achieving them. It adds a crucial dimension to the numerous studies on the after-the-fact social impacts of research.