IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v35y2008i5p302-318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to sponsor ground-breaking research: A comparison of funding schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Heinze

Abstract

A key challenge for research management and science policy is support of scientific exploration of new research frontiers. This paper examines funding schemes that aim to encourage scientists to conduct unconventional and high-risk research. Schemes are analyzed across institutional dimensions, such as: target group and field, selection process and criteria, budget size, and funding duration. It argues that sponsorship programs for ground-breaking research should: respond to the existing talent pool rather than setting arbitrary funding thresholds, undertake efforts to contend with the selection bias of peer review, and take an applicant's ongoing research into account. It discusses whether such programs should be within existing funding organizations, or if new funding agencies that are dedicated to sponsoring ground-breaking research should be set up. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Heinze, 2008. "How to sponsor ground-breaking research: A comparison of funding schemes," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(5), pages 302-318, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:35:y:2008:i:5:p:302-318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234208X317151
    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:scippl:v:35:y:2008:i:5:p:302-318. 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/spp .

    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.