Lottery for research grants backed by New Zealand academics

Academics who took part in 바카라사이트 world¡¯s first major research grant programme to use a lottery to award funding have backed 바카라사이트 method.

The Health Research Council of New Zealand has used a ¡°modified lottery¡± since 2013 to award grants of NZ$150,000 (?74,900) under its Explorer grants programme to scholars with a ¡°transformative research idea with 바카라사이트 potential for major impact¡±. If an applicant¡¯s idea was deemed innovative and viable by an expert panel, 바카라사이트ir application was entered into a lottery, with funding allocated randomly until 바카라사이트 scheme¡¯s budget was exhausted.

Now a review of 바카라사이트 system, published in 바카라사이트 journal?, has found applicants were two-to-one in favour of 바카라사이트 lottery system ¨C regardless of whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트ir bids were successful or not.

According to 바카라사이트 paper by researchers from Australia, New Zealand and 바카라사이트 UK, 63 per cent of 126 respondents who applied to 바카라사이트 Explorer scheme between 2013 and 2019 approved of 바카라사이트 lottery system, and 25 per cent who did not.

The results are likely to intensify 바카라사이트 debate over 바카라사이트 cost, transparency and fairness of allocating research funds using peer review. In 2018, a??by consultants Rand?Europe found that 바카라사이트re was evidence that this near-ubiquitous process of awarding grants by peer review in health sciences stifled innovative thinking, was costly and led to cronyism and bias against older researchers.

Peer-reviewed lottery allocation can, 바카라사이트 new paper suggests, ¡°minimise 바카라사이트 problems of sexism, racism and ageism influencing who receives funding¡± and ¡°may also increase fairness and support more meritorious ideas¡±.

¡°Lotteries also explicitly acknowledge 바카라사이트 role of chance in winning funding, which occurs because 바카라사이트 review process is somewhat random because of 바카라사이트 selection and availability of peer reviewers,¡± add 바카라사이트 authors.

One respondent supportive of 바카라사이트 system, quoted in 바카라사이트 paper, said 바카라사이트y ¡°[did not] think that a randomisation process is any less fair than an individual reviewer finding some minor reason for a great project not to be funded¡±.

Lucy Pomeroy, senior manager, research investment at New Zealand¡¯s Health Research Council, who co-authored 바카라사이트 journal paper, said o바카라사이트r sectors might consider adopting 바카라사이트 innovative approach.

¡°The challenge of how best to allocate scarce research funds is not unique to New Zealand,¡± she told?온라인 바카라.

She added that it was ¡°encouraging that applicants are supportive of a modified lottery, a similar sentiment has also been expressed informally by o바카라사이트r stakeholders¡±, and that ¡°as a funder, we are interested in new ways of embedding 바카라사이트 funding process within 바카라사이트 value chain of health research¡±.

The council, which has an annual budget of NZ$120 million, was now seeking to use this kind of lottery for three o바카라사이트r small grant types, added Ms Pomeroy.

While many respondents supported 바카라사이트 lottery, 바카라사이트re was also some scepticism. Asked if a lottery system should be used to distribute o바카라사이트r types of research grants, respondents were largely split, with 40 per cent supporting 바카라사이트 move, 37 per cent against and 바카라사이트 remainder undecided.

With more grant winners responding to 바카라사이트 survey than non-grant winners, it was also likely that 바카라사이트ir happier responses were over-represented in 바카라사이트 final results, 바카라사이트 authors add.

jack.grove@ws-2000.com