Branding/Logomark minus Citation Combined Shape Icon/Bookmark-empty Icon/Copy Icon/Collection Icon/Close Copy 7 no author result Created with Sketch. Icon/Back Created with Sketch. Match!

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

Published on Feb 1, 2016in Scientometrics 2.77
· DOI :10.1007/s11192-015-1773-5
Qiang Zhi2
Estimated H-index: 2
(CUFE: Central University of Finance and Economics),
Tianguang Meng5
Estimated H-index: 5
(THU: Tsinghua University)
Cite
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.
  • References (37)
  • Citations (9)
Cite
References37
Newest
Published on Feb 1, 2015in Science & Public Policy 1.57
Carter Bloch14
Estimated H-index: 14
(AU: Aarhus University),
Mads P. Sørensen6
Estimated H-index: 6
(AU: Aarhus University)
This paper examines the role of grant size in research funding. There is an increasing focus in a number of countries on larger grant forms, such as centers of excellence, and in some cases also increases in the size of individual project grants. Among the rationales for this are economies of scale in research and redistribution of resources towards top researchers in order to increases scientific productivity and pathbreaking research. However, there may potentially also be negative impacts of ...
Published on Jan 1, 2015in Journal of Informetrics 3.88
Jiang Wu5
Estimated H-index: 5
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Distributing scientific funding to the suitable universities and research fields is very important to the innovation acceleration in science and technology. Using a longitudinal panel dataset of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the total 224,087 sponsored projects is utilized to investigate the distributions of scientific funding across universities and research disciplines. The inequality of funding distribution is studied through the investigation of Gini coefficient, a...
Published on May 23, 2014in Science 41.04
Yu Xie40
Estimated H-index: 40
(PKU: Peking University)
In recent years, academic scholarship and public discourse have become increasingly preoccupied with social and economic inequality, which has risen in many countries. It is surprising that more attention has not been paid to the large, changing inequalities in the world of scientific research. I suggest that although the basic structure of inequalities in science has remained unchanged, their intensities and mechanisms may have been altered by recent forces of globalization and internet technol...
Published on Jan 1, 2014in China Soft Science
He Guang-x1
Estimated H-index: 1
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Using a national wide sampling data,this paper studied the inequality and concentration of RD funds among Chinese researchers. The result shows that the inequality of RD funds among researchers reaches an extremely high level. Gini coefficient of RD funds is as high as 0. 867,and the top 20% "richest"researchers grasp 90% of all RD funds. Further analysis shows that the concentration of RD outputs is regressive to "rich " researchers, and administrative leaders grasp too much funds. In sum,the p...
Published on Oct 1, 2013in Energy Policy 4.88
Qiang Zhi5
Estimated H-index: 5
(THU: Tsinghua University),
Jun Su9
Estimated H-index: 9
(THU: Tsinghua University)
+ 1 AuthorsLaura Diaz Anadon22
Estimated H-index: 22
(Harvard University)
Since 1978, when China launched its “opening up” reform, a range of large-scale national science and technology programs have been implemented to spur economic development. Energy has received significant attention and has become a growing priority in the past years. In this paper we have analyzed the goals, management, and impact over time of China's three largest national programs: Gong Guan, 863, and 973 Programs. Using quantitative metrics to describe the input and output, by conducting semi...
Published on Jan 1, 2013in Studies in Science of Science
Hou Hai-yan1
Estimated H-index: 1
(DUT: Dalian University of Technology)
Aiming to analyze the overall status of the support of science funding on SCI paper publishing,we choose 10 countries with most SCI papers in 2011 as research objects,including USA,China,Germany,Britain,Japan,France,Italy,Canada,Spain,Australia.The result shows that the ratio of funding papers in China is as high as 77.79%,much greater than other countries.Grants per funding paper of China reach 2.98,while Spain also reaches 2.74.And the grants per funding paper of Japan are relative low.Moreove...
Published on Jan 15, 2012
Paula E. Stephan36
Estimated H-index: 36
The beauty of science may be pure and eternal, but the practice of science costs money. And scientists, being human, respond to incentives and costs, in money and glory. Choosing a research topic, deciding what papers to write and where to publish them, sticking with a familiar area or going into something new--the payoff may be tenure or a job at a highly ranked university or a prestigious award or a bump in salary. The risk may be not getting any of that. At a time when science is seen as an e...
Published on Oct 27, 2013
Dominique Haughton21
Estimated H-index: 21
,
Jonathan Haughton15
Estimated H-index: 15
Introduction.- Graphical exploratory methods.- Sample size issues.- Beyond linear regression.- Adjustment for spatial correlation.- The issue of causality.- Non-homogeneity/mixtures.- Bayesian analysis.- Grouping methods.- Panel data issues.- Measures of poverty and inequality.- Bootstrap.- Fuzzy methods for poverty measures.- Combining data sets.
Published on Jan 1, 2011
Dominique Haughton21
Estimated H-index: 21
,
Jonathan Haughton15
Estimated H-index: 15
Published on Jan 1, 2009in Studies in Science of Science
Wu Yi-shan1
Estimated H-index: 1
As is known to us,Lorenz curve and Gini Coefficient are classic indicators in the field of economics.They have been used to analyze income inequality for about one hundred years since they were designed.Economists or sociologists generally draw a Lorenz curve and calculate the Gini coefficient based on incomes data of a group,a city or a country.The value of Gini coefficient(from 0 to 1) reveals the degree of income inequality(from complete inequality to complete equality).There is tremendous am...
Cited By9
Newest
Published in Research Policy 5.42
Margit Osterloh24
Estimated H-index: 24
(UZH: University of Zurich),
Bruno S. Frey88
Estimated H-index: 88
(UZH: University of Zurich)
Abstract Publications in top journals today have a powerful influence on academic careers although there is much criticism of using journal rankings to evaluate individual articles. We ask why this practice of performance evaluation is still so influential. We suggest this is the case because a majority of authors benefit from the present system due to the extreme skewness of citation distributions. “Performance paradox” effects aggravate the problem. Three extant suggestions for reforming perfo...
Fei Shu4
Estimated H-index: 4
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences),
Charles-Antoine Julien5
Estimated H-index: 5
(McGill University),
Vincent Larivière38
Estimated H-index: 38
(UdeM: Université de Montréal)
Published on Nov 1, 2018in Journal of Informetrics 3.88
Dengsheng Wu (CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences), Lili Yuan1
Estimated H-index: 1
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
+ 1 AuthorsJianping Li (CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Abstract The inequality in research funding is an important issue, in which the measurement of inequality is the basis. The literature has mostly investigated the inequality in research funding by providing overall values of inequality but has rarely explored this topic through the internal structure of the overall inequality. In this paper, a three-stage nested Theil index is employed to decompose the overall inequality in research funding into the between and within components. Moreover, a dec...
Published on Nov 1, 2018in Journal of Informetrics 3.88
Zhifeng Yin1
Estimated H-index: 1
(CUFE: Central University of Finance and Economics),
Zheng Liang1
Estimated H-index: 1
(THU: Tsinghua University),
Qiang Zhi1
Estimated H-index: 1
(CUFE: Central University of Finance and Economics)
Abstract Basic research is the main powerhouse of a country’s potential for continuous economic growth, and national-level scientific research funding is an important source of capital that supports this basic research. Given these observations, this paper takes micro-level data from projects funded by the Department of Management Sciences in the National Natural Science Foundation of China between 2006 and 2010 to examine the relationship between the efficient use of research funding and the le...
Published on Jul 31, 2018in PLOS ONE 2.78
Zhiyi Shao1
Estimated H-index: 1
,
Yongming Li1
Estimated H-index: 1
+ 2 AuthorsYingjie Guo1
Estimated H-index: 1
Published on Jul 1, 2018in Physica A-statistical Mechanics and Its Applications 2.50
Ding-wei Huang8
Estimated H-index: 8
(CYCU: Chung Yuan Christian University)
We propose a new model to investigate the theoretical implications of a novel funding system. We introduce new parameters to model the accumulated advantage. We assume that all scientists are equal and follow the same regulations. The model presents three distinct regimes. In regime (I), the fluidity of funding is significant. The funding distribution is continuous. The concentration of funding is effectively suppressed. In both regimes (II) and (III), a small group of scientists emerges as a ci...
Published on Mar 1, 2018in Quality & Quantity
Joonha Jeon1
Estimated H-index: 1
(KAIST),
So Young Kim1
Estimated H-index: 1
(KAIST)
This study examines whether the inequality between universities is increasing in terms of research output, in the context of the New Public Management (NPM) regime based higher education reform in South Korea. Recent reforms in higher education sectors around the world illustrate a number of characteristics of NPM, with performance-based funding standing out among others. Performance-based funding has brought up several concerns, especially with unintended consequences of the reforms such as a w...
Published on Jul 1, 2017in Scientometrics 2.77
Jianping LiXiaolei19
Estimated H-index: 19
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences),
Yongjia Xie4
Estimated H-index: 4
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
+ 1 AuthorsYuanping Chen1
Estimated H-index: 1
(CAS: Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Research funding is a significant support for the development of scientific research. The inequality of research funding is an intrinsic feature of science, and policy makers have realized the over-concentration of funding allocation. Previous studies have tried to use the Gini coefficient to measure this inequality; however, the phenomena of multiple funding sources and funding subdivision have not been deeply discussed and empirically studied due to limitations on data availability. This paper...
Published on Mar 1, 2017in Scientometrics 2.77
Yawen Zou1
Estimated H-index: 1
(ASU: Arizona State University),
Manfred Dietrich Laubichler18
Estimated H-index: 18
(ASU: Arizona State University)
Abstract Systems biology is a new field of biology that has great implications for agriculture, medicine, and sustainability. In this article we explore the contributions of Chinese authors to systems biology through analysis of the metadata of more than 9000 articles on systems biology. Our big-data approach includes scientometric analysis, GIS analysis, co-word network analysis, and comparative analysis. By 2013 China has become second in the number of publications on systems biology. Similar ...