IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2410.12356.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing Scientific Grants

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Carnehl
  • Marco Ottaviani
  • Justus Preusser

Abstract

This paper overviews the economics of scientific grants, focusing on the interplay between the inherent uncertainty in research, researchers' incentives, and grant design. Grants differ from traditional market systems and other science and innovation policy tools, such as prizes and patents. We outline the main economic forces specific to science, noting the limited attention given to grant funding in the economics literature. Using tools from information economics, we identify key incentive problems at various stages of the grant funding process and offer guidance for effective grant design. In the allocation stage, funders aim to select the highest-merit applications while minimizing evaluation costs. The selection rule, in turn, impacts researchers' incentives to apply and invest in their proposals. In the grant management stage, funders monitor researchers to ensure efficient use of funds. We discuss the advantages and potential pitfalls of (partial) lotteries and emphasize the effectiveness of staged grant design in promoting a productive use of grants. Beyond these broadly applicable insights, our overview highlights the need for further research on grantmaking. Understudied areas include, at the micro level, the interplay of different grant funding stages, and at the macro level, the interaction of grants with other instruments in the market for science.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Carnehl & Marco Ottaviani & Justus Preusser, 2024. "Designing Scientific Grants," Papers 2410.12356, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2410.12356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.12356
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Motivating Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1823-1860, October.
    2. Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2008. "The Optimal Allocation of Prizes in Contests," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 615-631, Springer.
    3. Pereyra, Juan Sebastián & Silva, Francisco, 2023. "Optimal assignment mechanisms with imperfect verification," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), May.
    4. Susan Athey & Juan Camilo Castillo & Esha Chaudhuri & Michael Kremer & Alexandre Simoes Gomes & Christopher M Snyder, 2022. "Expanding capacity for vaccines against Covid-19 and future pandemics: a review of economic issues," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 38(4), pages 742-770.
    5. Li, Yunan, 2020. "Mechanism design with costly verification and limited punishments," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    6. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    7. Catherine Bobtcheff & Jérôme Bolte & Thomas Mariotti, 2017. "Researcher’s Dilemma," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 969-1014.
    8. Kyle R. Myers, 2022. "Some Tradeoffs of Competition in Grant Contests," Papers 2207.02379, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    9. Yingkai Li & Xiaoyun Qiu, 2023. "Screening Signal-Manipulating Agents via Contests," Papers 2302.09168, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    10. Wei Yang Tham & Joseph Staudt & Elisabeth Ruth Perlman & Stephanie D. Cheng, 2024. "Scientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps," Working Papers 24-08, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    11. Elchanan Ben-Porath & Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman, 2014. "Optimal Allocation with Costly Verification," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(12), pages 3779-3813, December.
    12. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    13. Ted von Hippel & Courtney von Hippel, 2015. "To Apply or Not to Apply: A Survey Analysis of Grant Writing Costs and Benefits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-8, March.
    14. Isaiah Andrews & Maximilian Kasy, 2019. "Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2766-2794, August.
    15. Kevin A. Bryan & Heidi L. Williams, 2021. "Innovation: Market Failures and Public Policies," NBER Working Papers 29173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Axel Niemeyer & Justus Preusser, 2024. "Optimal Allocation with Peer Information," Papers 2410.08954, arXiv.org.
    17. Bryan, Kevin A. & Lemus, Jorge, 2017. "The direction of innovation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 247-272.
    18. Kevin Gross & Carl T Bergstrom, 2019. "Contest models highlight inherent inefficiencies of scientific funding competitions," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Moroni, Sofia, 2022. "Experimentation in Organizations," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(3), July.
    20. Dawei Fang & Thomas Noe & Philipp Strack, 2020. "Turning Up the Heat: The Discouraging Effect of Competition in Contests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(5), pages 1940-1975.
    21. Wright, Brian Davern, 1983. "The Economics of Invention Incentives: Patents, Prizes, and Research Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 691-707, September.
    22. Marina Halac & Navin Kartik & Qingmin Liu, 2016. "Optimal Contracts for Experimentation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(3), pages 1040-1091.
    23. Hugo Hopenhayn & Francesco Squintani, 2021. "On the Direction of Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(7), pages 1991-2022.
    24. Deniz Kattwinkel & Jan Knoepfle, 2023. "Costless Information and Costly Verification: A Case for Transparency," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(2), pages 504-548.
    25. Victor Augias & Eduardo Perez-Richet, 2023. "Non-Market Allocation Mechanisms: Optimal Design and Investment Incentives," Papers 2303.11805, arXiv.org.
    26. Reshmaan Hussam & Natalia Rigol & Benjamin N. Roth, 2022. "Targeting High Ability Entrepreneurs Using Community Information: Mechanism Design in the Field," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(3), pages 861-898, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Carnehl & Marco Ottaviani & Justus Preusser, 2024. "Designing Scientific Grants," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 4, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Kyle R. Myers & Wei Yang Tham & Jerry Thursby & Marie Thursby & Nina Cohodes & Karim Lakhani & Rachel Mural & Yilun Xu, 2023. "New Facts and Data about Professors and their Research," Papers 2312.01442, arXiv.org.
    3. Kyle Myers & Wei Yang Tham, 2023. "Money, Time, and Grant Design," Papers 2312.06479, arXiv.org.
    4. Bloch, Francis & Dutta, Bhaskar & Dziubiński, Marcin, 2023. "Selecting a winner with external referees," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    5. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.
    7. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    8. Kaustav Das & Nicolas Klein, 2020. "Do Stronger Patents Lead to Faster Innovation? The Effect of Duplicative Search," Discussion Papers in Economics 20/03, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    9. Marchiori, Carmen & Minelli, Enrico, 2023. "Talent, basic research and growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    10. Joshua Graff Zivin & Elizabeth Lyons, 2021. "The Effects of Prize Structures on Innovative Performance," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 577-581, May.
    11. Yingkai Li & Xiaoyun Qiu, 2023. "Screening Signal-Manipulating Agents via Contests," Papers 2302.09168, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    12. de Bettignies, Jean-Etienne & Ries, John, 2023. "When less is more: Information and the financing of innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 346-369.
    13. Kaustav Das & Nicolas Klein, 2024. "Do Stronger Patents Lead To Faster Innovation? The Effect Of Clustered Search," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 65(2), pages 915-954, May.
    14. Achim, Peter, 2024. "Innovation through competitive experimentation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    15. Sadler, Evan, 2021. "Dead ends," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Baruffaldi, Stefano & Poege, Felix, 2020. "A Firm Scientific Community: Industry Participation and Knowledge Diffusion," IZA Discussion Papers 13419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Alfonso Gambardella & Pooyan Khashabi & Claudio Panico, 2020. "Managing Autonomy in Industrial Research and Development: A Project-Level Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 165-181, January.
    18. Chloe Kim Glaeser & Stephen Glaeser & Eva Labro, 2023. "Proximity and the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 3080-3099, May.
    19. Francis Bloch & Bhaskar Dutta & Marcin Dziubinski, 2023. "Selecting a Winner with External Referees," Working Papers 99, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    20. Alessandro Spiganti, 2022. "Wealth Inequality and the Exploration of Novel Alternatives," Working Papers 2022:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".

    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:arx:papers:2410.12356. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.