IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v43y2016i3p352-362..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moral hazard and adverse selection in research funding: Centres of excellence in Norway and Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Siri Brorstad Borlaug

Abstract

The past two decades have seen an increase in the use of funding schemes such as ‘centres of excellence’. This paper examines how centre of excellence schemes have been adapted to two distinct national public research systems (Norway and Sweden) and the role of the schemes in the systems. It develops a conceptual framework involving three impact dimensions of the centres: organisational, social and international. Together with principal–agent theory the conceptual framework is used to investigate and explain which dimensions are given the most emphasis in the two countries. The main findings are that, in a country with a highly competitive funding system (Sweden), funding agencies emphasise organisational impact to overcome the problem of moral hazard, while a country characterised by relatively high block grant funding of the universities (Norway) tends to emphasise international impact, and invests in strategies to overcome the problem of adverse selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Siri Brorstad Borlaug, 2016. "Moral hazard and adverse selection in research funding: Centres of excellence in Norway and Sweden," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 352-362.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:43:y:2016:i:3:p:352-362.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scv048
    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tomas Hellström, 2018. "Centres of Excellence and Capacity Building: from Strategy to Impact," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 543-552.
    2. Peixin Duan, 2022. "How large of a grant size is appropriate? Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-14, February.

    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:43:y:2016:i:3:p:352-362.. 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.