Chinese scientists say funding shake-up has made it harder to win grants

Gemma Conroy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-03207-6

IF: 64.8

2024-10-30

Nature

Abstract:Applications have soared, but the success rate for key grants has dropped since last year. Applications have soared, but the success rate for key grants has dropped since last year.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Larger or longer grants unlikely to push senior scientists towards high-risk, high-reward work

Dalmeet Singh Chawla

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00929-5

IF: 64.8

2024-03-27

Nature

Abstract:A survey of US professors suggests that broad changes to grant schemes might be needed to incentivize new approaches to research. A survey of US professors suggests that broad changes to grant schemes might be needed to incentivize new approaches to research.

multidisciplinary sciences
China–US research collaborations are in decline — this is bad news for everyone

Gemma Conroy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02046-9

IF: 64.8

2024-07-20

Nature

Abstract:Scientists say that the drop in partnerships between the scientific powerhouses will hold back research on priorities such as global warming. Scientists say that the drop in partnerships between the scientific powerhouses will hold back research on priorities such as global warming.

multidisciplinary sciences
Public funding and the ascent of Chinese science: Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China

Albert G.Z. Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.103983

IF: 7.2

2020-06-01

Research Policy

Abstract:<p>We investigate the role of public funding in the rapid ascent of Chinese science by examining the impact of a major upgrade of a funding program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China in 2011. Using research grant level data and a difference-in-differences estimator, we found that the more generous funding resulted in higher research output, measured by the number of publications, the number of citation-weighted publications, the number of journal impact factor-adjusted publications, and the maximum journal impact factor. This belies significant variation in the impact of the change in funding by researcher characteristics: 1) less-established researchers benefit more from the funding upgrade; 2) scientific fields that are more likely to be financially constrained benefited more; and 3) researchers from less-prestigious research institutions made more productive use of the additional funds. Finally, we found that the funding upgrade has led to increasing collaboration with researchers from top science-producing foreign countries for the less-prestigious institutions.</p>

management
The importance of quality in austere times: University competitiveness and grant income

Ye Sun,Athen Ma,Georg von Graevenitz,Vito Latora

2023-09-27

Abstract:After 2009 many governments implemented austerity measures, often restricting science funding. Did such restrictions further skew grant income towards elite scientists and universities? And did increased competition for funding undermine participation? UK science funding agencies significantly reduced numbers of grants and total grant funding in response to austerity, but surprisingly restrictions of science funding were relaxed after the 2015 general election. Exploiting this natural experiment, we show that conventional measures of university competitiveness are poor proxies for competitiveness. An alternative measure of university competitiveness, drawn from complexity science, captures the highly dynamical way in which universities engage in scientific subjects. Building on a data set of 43,430 UK funded grants between 2006 and 2020, we analyse rankings of UK universities and investigate the effect of research competitiveness on grant income. When austerity was relaxed in 2015 the elasticity of grant income w.r.t. research competitiveness fell, reflecting increased effort by researchers at less competitive universities. These scientists increased number and size of grant applications, increasing grant income. The study reveals how funding agencies, facing heterogeneous competitiveness in the population of scientists, affect research effort across the distribution of competitiveness.

General Economics
China'S Research Culture

Yigong Shi,Yi Rao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1196916

IF: 56.9

2010-01-01

Science

Abstract:Government research funds in China have been growing at an annual rate of more than 20%, exceeding even the expectations of China's most enthusiastic scientists. In theory, this could allow China to make truly outstanding progress in science and research, complementing the nation's economic success. In reality, however, rampant problems in research funding—some attributable to the system and others cultural—are slowing down China's potential pace of innovation.
Analysis of the reasons for failures in applying to China Natural Science Foundation and suggestions

Xue-dong YAN,Ying CHEN,Huan-ping ZHANG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-1924.2010.04.006

2010-01-01

Abstract:It is getting very competitive in the application to Natural Science Foundation of China.To improve the chances of success in the application, we summarized and analyzed the peer review opinions for the 91 failed applications from 2004 to 2008. Problems were disclosed for these application projects in scientific significance, research content, research design, novelty, preparative research, research group,and application writing. Countermeasures were proposed for the department of research to improve the application quality.
Motivating Innovation: the Impact of Prestigious Talent Funding on Junior Scientists

Meiling Li,Yang Wang,Haifeng Du,Aruhan Bai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105081

IF: 7.2

2024-01-01

Research Policy

Abstract:Despite the critical role of creativity in advancing science and technology, our understanding of the funding schemes that drive creativity remains remarkably limited. Concerns have arisen that grants supporting predetermined projects may unintentionally encourage incremental research, prompting governments to explore different funding approaches. For instance, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) initiated the Excellent Young Scientists Fund (EYS), a prestigious talent funding program designed to support junior scientists. Given that radical innovation is a key concern for contemporary China, we empirically estimate the impact of the EYS program on scientific productivity, citation impact, and the generation of radical research. Utilizing a unique dataset, we find that the EYS program enhances both the productivity and citation impact of early-career Chinese scientists. Strikingly, we observe that EYS investigators tend to consolidate current science, resulting in a reduction of disruption compared to their counterparts. We propose several theories to explain this reduced level of disruption, with a particular focus on research strategies. Our investigations suggest that exploitation strategies and a focus on publishing hot-topic papers contribute to this observed effect. These findings provide valuable insights into the impact of funding and hold important policy implications for supporting disruptive research endeavors.
The growth momentum of China in producing international scientific publications seems to have slowed down

Ping Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2012.12.005

IF: 7.466

2013-01-01

Information Processing & Management

Abstract:In 2010 and this for the first time in 20years the number of Chinese publications included in the Web of science dropped significantly. During the same period the USA kept a steady growth, although with a low rate of increase. This might indicate that China has reached a point of change in its growing speed in producing scientific publications. Why this could be the case is discussed in this short note.
Artificial selection versus natural selection: Which causes the Matthew effect of science funding allocation in China?

Gupeng Zhang,Libin Xiong,Xiao Wang,Jianing Dong,Hongbo Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa024

IF: 2.087

2020-01-01

Science and Public Policy

Abstract:To investigate either artificial or natural selection leads to the Matthew effect in the science funding allocation and its consequences, this study retrieves 274,732 publications by Chinese scientists from the Web of Science and examines how the disparity of science funding determines scientists' research performance. We employ the Negative Binomial Model and other models to regress the publication's citation times, which measures the research performance, on the number of funding grants and their amounts of currency that the publication receives, which measures the disparity of science funding. The empirical results suggest an inverted U-shaped relationship. However, the optimum number of funding grants far exceeds the actual number that most publications receive, implying that increasing the funding for academic research positively impacts scientists' research performance. The natural disparity thus plays a major role in distributing the science funding. Additionally, China's publication-based academic assessment system may be another main cause.
Scientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps

Wei Yang Tham,Joseph Staudt,Elisabeth Ruth Perlman,Stephanie D. Cheng

2024-02-12

Abstract:We study how delays in NIH grant funding affect the career outcomes of research personnel. Using comprehensive earnings and tax records linked to university transaction data along with a difference-in-differences design, we find that a funding interruption of more than 30 days has a substantial effect on job placements for personnel who work in labs with a single NIH R01 research grant, including a 3 percentage point (40%) increase in the probability of not working in the US. Incorporating information from the full 2020 Decennial Census and data on publications, we find that about half of those induced into nonemployment appear to permanently leave the US and are 90% less likely to publish in a given year, with even larger impacts for trainees (postdocs and graduate students). Among personnel who continue to work in the US, we find that interrupted personnel earn 20% less than their continuously-funded peers, with the largest declines concentrated among trainees and other non-faculty personnel (such as staff and undergraduates). Overall, funding delays account for about 5% of US nonemployment in our data, indicating that they have a meaningful effect on the scientific labor force at the national level.

General Economics
Flipping the grant application review process

Ivo D Dinov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1628201

Abstract:The return on research investment resulting from new breakthrough scientific discoveries may be decreasing over time due to the law of diminishing returns, the relative decrease of research funding in terms of purchasing power parity, and various activities gaming the system. By altering the grant-review process, the scientific community may directly address the third problem. There is evidence that peer reviews of research proposals may lack reliability and may produce invalid or inconsistent ratings. In addition, extreme focus on grantsmanship threatens to uproot a cornerstone principle that scientific-value should be the key driver in funding decision-making. This opinion provides (1) a justification of the need to consider alternative strategies to boost the impact of public investment in innovative scientific discovery, (2) proposes a framework for flipping the traditional front-loaded peer-review approach to allocation of research funding, into a new back-loaded assessment of scholarly return on investment, and (3) provokes the scientific community to accelerate the debate on alternative funding mechanisms, as the stakes of inaction may be very high.
Caught in the Crossfire: Fears of Chinese-American Scientists

Yu Xie,Xihong Lin,Ju Li,Qian He,Junming Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.10642

2022-09-23

Abstract:The US leadership in science and technology has greatly benefitted from immigrants from other countries, most notably from China in the recent decades. However, feeling the pressure of potential federal investigation since the 2018 launch of the China Initiative under the Trump administration, Chinese-origin scientists in the US now face higher incentives to leave the US and lower incentives to apply for federal grants. Analyzing data pertaining to institutional affiliations of more than 2.3 million scientific papers, we find a steady increase in the return migration of Chinese-origin scientists from the US back to China. We also conducted a survey of Chinese-origin scientists employed by US universities in tenure or tenure-track positions (n=1300), with results revealing general feelings of fear and anxiety that lead them to consider leaving the US and/or stop applying for federal grants.

Physics and Society,Digital Libraries,Applications
Funding allocation, inequality, and scientific research output: an empirical study based on the life science sector of Natural Science Foundation of China

Qiang Zhi,Tianguang Meng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1773-5

IF: 3.801

2015-12-11

Scientometrics

Abstract:Scientific research activity produces the “Matthew Effect” on resource allocation. Based on a data set in the life sciences field from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) during the 11th Five-Year-Plan (2006–2010), this paper makes an empirical study on how the Matthew Effect of funding allocation at the institutional level and city level impact scientific research activity output. With Gini coefficient evaluation, descriptive statistic analysis, and the Poisson regression model, we found that there has been a rapid increase in the concentration degree of funding allocation among institutions and cities. Within a period of 5 years, the Gini coefficients of total funding of institutions and cities as the units of measurement have increased from 0.61 and 0.74 to 0.67 and 0.79 respectively. However, this concentration in funding allocation did not result in significant additional benefits. Institutions awarded with more funding did not produce the expected positive spillover effect on their scientific research activity output. Instead, an “inverted U-shape” pattern of decreasing returns to scale was discovered, under which there was a negative effect on internal scientific research activity in the majority of institutions with concentrated funding allocation. Meanwhile, the result shows that Young Scholars projects under the NFSC produced high-level output. We conclude the study by discussing the possible reasons of the inverted U-shape pattern and its policy implications.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Comparative Study on Output Performance of Major Public Funds in Terms of Chinese-language Publications

ZHOU Ping,ZHANG Xu,ZHOU Dongmei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7695.2012.19.010

2012-01-01

Abstract:Based on publications indexed in the Chinese Science and Technology Papers and Citation Database(CSTPCD) and four major government funding resources,the paper analyzed relations between funding and publication productivity from different perspectives.Government funding to research and development has been increased continuously.Basic research and technology development are treated differently.Government's basic policy can be generalized as:while ensuring basic research actively supporting technology development.Regional distribution of funding resources is highly skewed because of uneven distribution of research capability and scale,which also reflects the basic rules of competitive funding policies-funds goes with capability.Study based on the National Science Foundation of China(NSFC) shows that NSFC's contribution to regional CSTPCD publications is going towards even distribution;Funding strength among science domains varies with life sciences,medical science and materials science benefit the most.Nevertheless,publication productivity of science domains doesn't correlates significantly with funding strength.
Research Misconduct Investigations in China's Science Funding System

Li Tang,Linan Wang,Guangyuan Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00459-9

2023-11-22

Abstract:As stewards of public money, government funding agencies have the obligation and responsibility to uphold the integrity of funded research. Despite an increasing amount of empirical studies examining research-related misconduct, a majority of these studies focus on retracted publications. How agencies spot funding-relevant wrongdoing and what sanctions the offenders face remain largely unexplored. This is particularly true for public funding agencies in emerging science powers. To amend this oversight, we retrieved and analyzed all publicized investigation results from China's largest basic research funding agency over the period from 2005 to 2021. Our findings reveal that both the "police patrol" and "fire alarm" approaches are used to identify misconduct and deter funding-related fraud in China. The principal triggers for investigations are journal article retractions, whistleblowing, and plagiarism detection software. Among the six funding-related misconduct types publicized and punished, the top three are: (1) fraudulent papers, (2) information fabrication and/or falsification in the research proposal, and (3) proposal plagiarism. The most common administrative sanctions are debarment and reclamation of grants. This article argues that more systematic research and cooperation among stakeholders is needed to cultivate research integrity in emerging science powers like China. Specific training and education should be provided for young scientists to help them avoid the pitfall of academic misconduct.
Exploration, Exploitation and Funding Success: Evidence from Junior Scientists Supported by the Chinese Young Scientists Fund

Liying Guo,Yang Wang,Meiling Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101492

IF: 3.7

2024-01-01

Journal of Informetrics

Abstract:Scientists' choice of research questions is often shaped by an "essential tension" between exploring new or risky ideas and exploiting conventional wisdoms. However, we still lack understanding regarding the association between exploration, exploitation, and funding success, which is a crucial aspect of career development for junior scientists in today's highly competitive environment. In this study, we adopt a systematic approach to analyze the career histories of over 20,000 junior scientists supported by the Chinese Young Scientists Fund. We quantitatively assess the level of exploration during the Young Scientists Fund cycle using two approaches, and focus on the association of exploration on securing subsequent funding. Despite the positive relationship between exploring new topics and novelty, our findings reveal that junior scientists who choose to explore new research topics in the first funding cycle face significantly lower chances of obtaining subsequent funding. Additionally, among those who do secure subsequent funding, individuals who engage in exploratory research in the first funding cycle tend to wait longer. Furthermore, our study examines the predictive power of various observed variables at the individual level in predicting funding success, finding modest predictive power. Overall, this work sheds light on the underlying patterns of individual careers and has policy implications in supporting junior scientists engaged in exploratory research. By unraveling the dynamics between exploration, exploitation, and funding success, our study offers valuable insights to nurture early career researchers.
The Outflow of Academic Papers from China: Why is It Happening and Can It Be Stemmed?

Jing Shao,Huiyun Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1087/20110203

2011-01-01

Learned Publishing

Abstract:Helped by deepening reform and openness, as well as increased overall national strength, science and technology in China have developed rapidly in recent years. The number of published scientific papers has also increased year by year. Statistics released in November 2009 by the Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China (ISTC) showed that the number of Science Citation Index (SCI) papers, Engineering Index (EI) papers and Index to Scientific & Technical Proceedings (ISTP) in 2008 from mainland China was 95,500, 85,000, and 59,299, and accounted for 6.6% (rank 4), 21.5% (rank 1), and 11.5% (rank 2), respectively. These were up, compared with 2007, by 7.2%, 12.3%, and 37.5%, respectively. Overall, in 2008 , the ‘Chinese’ total of 270,924 papers accounted for 11.5% of all papers and ranked 2 in the world. This indicates that in numerical terms mainland China is near the top position. It is a pity, however, that all these papers are written in English and that most of them are published in journals of foreign countries, such as the US and the UK. This outflow, especially of papers reflecting outstanding achievements in scientific research, has become very common, with the trend increasing year by year. (For example, in the 1990s, Chinese scientists published only about 6,000 papers per year covered by SCI,1 compared with the 95,500 quoted above.) Moreover, seldom are outstanding domestic or foreign results published in Chinese journals, and we believe that such an outflow has hindered the development of Chinese journals. China has set up a large number of so-called ‘Key Laboratories’, and some of these have obtained highlevel results, such as those on the rice and human genomes, and in paleontology. If more of these papers could be published in Chinese journals, then perhaps Chinese journals could obtain a better position in the world. Thus we believe it is of great significance to find out the reasons for the outflow of excellent papers and then take measures to stem this flow.
International Comparison on Structural Transformation of R&D Funds Source and Chinese Choice of Transformation

Xu Qingrui,Fan Baoqun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/picmet.1999.808412

1999-01-01

Abstract:Summary form only given. Since entering the 1990s, profound changes have taken place in the world and competition in science and technology is becoming the core of international strife. Therefore, R&D funds have become the essential condition that a nation acquires' long-term competitive advantage and international competitiveness. So, it is very important for a country to timely adjust its structure of R&D funds on the basis of its character and national need. Based on this view, this paper compares the three aspects of the structural transformation process, i.e. the structure of R&D funds by source, the structure of R&D funds by performing sector and the structure of R&D funds by character of work in both China and the USA
Systemic racial disparities in funding rates at the National Science Foundation

Christine Yifeng Chen,Sara S Kahanamoku,Aradhna Tripati,Rosanna A Alegado,Vernon R Morris,Karen Andrade,Justin Hosbey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83071

IF: 7.7

2022-11-29

eLife

Abstract:Concerns about systemic racism at academic and research institutions have increased over the past decade. Here, we investigate data from the National Science Foundation (NSF), a major funder of research in the United States, and find evidence for pervasive racial disparities. In particular, white principal investigators (PIs) are consistently funded at higher rates than most non-white PIs. Funding rates for white PIs have also been increasing relative to annual overall rates with time. Moreover, disparities occur across all disciplinary directorates within the NSF and are greater for research proposals. The distributions of average external review scores also exhibit systematic offsets based on PI race. Similar patterns have been described in other research funding bodies, suggesting that racial disparities are widespread. The prevalence and persistence of these racial disparities in funding have cascading impacts that perpetuate a cumulative advantage to white PIs across all of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Chinese scientists say funding shake-up has made it harder to win grants

Larger or longer grants unlikely to push senior scientists towards high-risk, high-reward work

China–US research collaborations are in decline — this is bad news for everyone

Public funding and the ascent of Chinese science: Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China

The importance of quality in austere times: University competitiveness and grant income

China'S Research Culture

Analysis of the reasons for failures in applying to China Natural Science Foundation and suggestions

Motivating Innovation: the Impact of Prestigious Talent Funding on Junior Scientists

The growth momentum of China in producing international scientific publications seems to have slowed down

Artificial selection versus natural selection: Which causes the Matthew effect of science funding allocation in China?

Scientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps

Flipping the grant application review process

Caught in the Crossfire: Fears of Chinese-American Scientists

Funding allocation, inequality, and scientific research output: an empirical study based on the life science sector of Natural Science Foundation of China

Comparative Study on Output Performance of Major Public Funds in Terms of Chinese-language Publications

Research Misconduct Investigations in China's Science Funding System

Exploration, Exploitation and Funding Success: Evidence from Junior Scientists Supported by the Chinese Young Scientists Fund

The Outflow of Academic Papers from China: Why is It Happening and Can It Be Stemmed?

International Comparison on Structural Transformation of R&D Funds Source and Chinese Choice of Transformation

Systemic racial disparities in funding rates at the National Science Foundation