How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers?

Vaesen, Krist and Katzav, Joel (2017) How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers?. PLoS One, 12 9: e0183967. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0183967


Author Vaesen, Krist
Katzav, Joel
Title How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers?
Journal name PLoS One   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1932-6203
Publication date 2017-09-08
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0183967
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 12
Issue 9
Start page e0183967
Total pages 11
Place of publication San Francisco, CA, United States
Publisher Public Library of Science
Language eng
Abstract Scientists are increasingly dissatisfied with funding systems that rely on peer assessment and, accordingly, have suggested several proposals for reform. One of these proposals is to distribute available funds equally among all qualified researchers, with no interference from peer review. Despite its numerous benefits, such egalitarian sharing faces the objection, among others, that it would lead to an unacceptable dilution of resources. The aim of the present paper is to assess this particular objection. We estimate (for the Netherlands, the U.S. and the U.K.) how much researchers would receive were they to get an equal share of the government budgets that are currently allocated through competitive peer assessment. For the Netherlands, we furthermore estimate what researchers would receive were we to differentiate between researchers working in low-cost, intermediate-cost and high-cost disciplines. Given these estimates, we then determine what researchers could afford in terms of PhD students, Postdocs, travel and equipment. According to our results, researchers could, on average, maintain current PhD student and Postdoc employment levels, and still have at their disposal a moderate (the U.K.) to considerable (the Netherlands, U.S.) budget for travel and equipment. This suggests that the worry that egalitarian sharing leads to unacceptable dilution of resources is unjustified. Indeed, our results strongly suggest that there is room for far more egalitarian distribution of funds than happens in the highly competitive funding schemes so prevalent today.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: HERDC Pre-Audit
School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 15 Sep 2017, 15:24:53 EST by Joel Katzav on behalf of School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry