Researchers in Canada are contemplating a recent report that suggests it is more expensive to review and reject applications for small baseline grants than to simply provide the grant without conducting a review. According to this study, if the review process was eliminated, the Canadian government could save money while funding the projects of every qualified applicant of baseline grants. Bora from A Blog Around the Clock speculates that foregoing review could promote "truly innovative science," and discusses the feasibility of implementing such a plan in the U.S.
Related ScienceBlogs Posts:
- Log in to post comments
More like this
This is very interesting, referring to Canadian system:
Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System Exceeds the Cost of Giving Every Qualified Researcher a Baseline Grant:
Using Natural Science and Engineering Research Council Canada (NSERC) statistics, we show that the $40,000 (Canadian)…
About a week ago, my brother sent me a couple of interesting papers about funding in science, one in Canada, the other in the UK. I barely had time to skim the abstracts at the time, but thought I would put it up for discussion online and come back to it later. So I posted the link, abstract and…
It is always interesting to dig through one's blog archives and see what happened when, or get reminded of a post one forgot was ever written ;-)
So, here are some of the key posts on A Blog Around The Clock from 2009, chosen from almost 2000 posts that appeared here this year (which is MUCH less…
One of the favorite targets of pseudoscientists is the peer review system. After all, it's the system through which scientists submit their manuscripts describing their scientific findings or their grant proposals to their peers for an evaluation to determine whether they are scientifically…