Abstract
Drawing on a database of the competitive research funds in the Japanese academia, this study examines the distribution of research grants at the university and individual levels. The data indicates high inequality at the university level and slightly lower inequality at the individual level. Over the last three decades, the total grant budget has greatly increased and an increasing number of researchers have received the funds. Simultaneously, large-size grants have become more common and multiple awarding (i.e., one researcher receives more than one grant simultaneously) has become more frequent. These changes taken together, the level of inequality has not been changed substantially. The extent of inequality largely differs between scientific fields; especially high in basic natural sciences and relatively low in social sciences. A close examination of inequality over researchers’ career indicates different patterns of transition between fields and cohorts. Finally, both at the university and individual levels, the funding distribution is found more unequal than the distribution of publications as an output indicator.
ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
BibTeX
Zotero
EndNote
-
Asonuma, A 2002 Finance reform in Japanese higher education. Higher Education 43:109–126 .
-
Baumeister, AA, Bacharach, VR 1997 “Big” versus “little” science: Comparative analysis of program projects and individual research grants. American Journal on Mental Retardation 102:211–227 .
-
Burrell, QL 1991 The bradford distribution and the Gini index. Scientometrics 21:181–194 .
-
Center for National University Finance and Management 2009 Research on tuition and expenses for basic education and research at national universities Chiba Japan.
-
Center for National University Finance and Management. (2010). Research report of the finance and administration of national universities. Chiba, Japan.
-
Crespi, GA, Geuna, A 2008 An empirical study of scientific production: A cross country analysis, 1981–2002. Research Policy 37:565–579 .
-
Denavas-Walt, C, Proctor, BD, Smit, JC 2009 Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2008 United States Census Bureau Washington, DC.
-
Dorfman, R 1979 Formula for the Gini coefficient. Review of Economics and Statistics 61:146–149 .
-
Etzkowitz, H, Leydesdorff, L 2000 The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “Mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy 29:109–123 .
-
Geuna, A, Martin, BR 2003 University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva 41:277–304 .
-
Halffman, W, Leydesdorff, L 2010 Is inequality among universities increasing? Gini coefficients and the elusive rise of elite universities. Minerva 48:55–72 .
-
Hand, E 2008 222 NIH grants: 22 researchers. Nature 452:258 .
-
Hicks, D. M., & Katz, S. (2009). Toward a science policy framework addressing extreme inequity and resource distribution in research. http://works.bepress.com/sylvan_katz/1.
-
Kneller, R 2010 The changing governance of Japanese public science R Whitley J Gläser L Engwall eds. Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relations in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation Oxford University Press Oxford.
-
Kotchen, TA, Lindquist, T, Malik, K, Ehrenfeld, E 2004 NIH peer review of grant applications for clinical research. Journal of the American Medical Association 291:836–843 .
-
Lotka, AJ 1926 The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science 16:317–323.
-
MEXT Subcommittee of Academic Science 2003 What big science should be The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology Tokyo, Japan.
-
MEXT Subcommittee of Academic Science 2008 The direction of urgent measures on Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research: The summary of discussion Part 2 The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology Tokyo, Japan.
-
National Institute of Science and Technology Policy. (2009). Collecting the data study for evaluating the achievement of the S&T Basic Plans. NISTEP Report, 133. Tokyo, Japan: NISTEP.
-
OECD 1997 The evaluation of scientific research: Selected experiences OECD Paris, France.
-
Ray, D 1998 Development economics Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ.
-
Wadman, M 1997 NIH to abandon young investigator grants. Nature 390:211 .
-
Zitt, M, Barre, R, Sigogneau, A, Laville, F 1999 Territorial concentration and evolution of science and technology activities in the European Union: A descriptive analysis. Research Policy 28:545–562 .
Monthly Content Usage
| Abstract Views | Full Text Views | PDF Downloads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2020 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 2020 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 2020 | 3 | 5 | 2 |
| Dec 2020 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2021 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 2021 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó
AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Powered by PubFactory