Abstract
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 provides a more accurate analysis of the distribution inequality of research funding, and it considers all of the funding sources in the funding system and the subdivision of funding to junior researchers within research teams. We aim to determine the influence of these two aspects of the Gini results at the individual level. A dataset with 68,697 project records and 80,380 subproject records from the Chinese Academy of Sciences during the period from 2011 to 2015 is collected to validate the problem. The empirical results show that (1) the Gini coefficient for a single funding source is biased and may be overestimated or underestimated, and the most common data source, which is the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), causes the Gini coefficient to be underestimated; and (2) considering the subdivision of research funding lowers the inequality of research funding, with a smaller Gini coefficient, although the decrease is moderate.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Auranen, O., & Nieminen, M. (2010). University research funding and publication performance: An international comparison. Research Policy, 39(6), 822–834.
Cao, C., Li, N., Li, X., & Liu, L. (2013). Reforming China’s S&T system. Science, 341(6145), 460–462.
Cao, C., Ning, L. I., Xia, L. I., & Liu, L. (2015). Reforming China’s S&T system: A new perspective. Journal of Dialectics of Nature, 2015(1), 12–23. (in Chinese).
Eric, H. (2008). 222 NIH grants: 22 researchers. Nature, 452(7185), 258–259.
Fang, F. C., & Casadevall, A. (2016). Grant funding: Playing the odds. Science, 352(6282), 159.
Fedderke, J. W., & Goldschmidt, M. (2015). Does massive funding support of researchers work?: Evaluating the impact of the South African research chair funding initiative. Research Policy, 44(2), 467–482.
Halffman, W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Is inequality among universities increasing? Gini coefficients and the elusive rise of elite universities. Minerva, 48(1), 55–72.
He, G. X., Zhao, Y. D., & Yang, Q. Q. (2014). Inequality in allocation of R&D resources in China: An analysis on the concentration of R&D funds among Chinese researchers. China Soft Science, 2014(6), 58–66. (in Chinese).
Hicks, D., & Katz, J. S. (2011). Equity and excellence in research funding. Minerva, 49(2), 137–151.
Lok, C. (2010). Science funding: Science for the masses. Nature, 465(7297), 416–418.
Ma, A., Mondragón, R. J., & Latora, V. (2015). Anatomy of funded research in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(48), 14760–14765.
Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Vallanti, G. (2013). Does government funding complement or substitute private research funding to universities? Research Policy, 42(1), 63–75.
National Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of science and Technology (2015). China Science and Technology Statistics Data Book 2015. China Statistics Press. (in Chinese).
Shibayama, S. (2011). Distribution of academic research funds: A case of Japanese national research grant. Scientometrics, 88(1), 43–60.
Szell, M., & Sinatra, R. (2015). Research funding goes to rich clubs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(48), 14749–14750.
Vermund, S. H. (2008). NIH: Researchers lose out to war, not to each other. Nature, 452(7189), 811.
Wu, Y. (2010). Tackling undue concentration of federal research funding: An empirical assessment on NSF’s experimental program to stimulate competitive research (EPSCoR). Research Policy, 39(6), 835–841.
Wu, J. (2015). Distributions of scientific funding across universities and research disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 183–196.
Wu, J., Jin, M., & Ding, X.-H. (2015). Diversity of individual research disciplines in scientific funding. Scientometrics, 103(2), 669–686.
Xie, Y. (2014). Undemocracy: Inequalities in science. Science, 344(6186), 809–810.
Zhi, Q., & Meng, T. (2016). Funding allocation, inequality, and scientific research output: An empirical study based on the life science sector of Natural Science Foundation of China. Scientometrics, 106(2), 603–628.
Acknowledgement
This research has been supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71425002, 71571179), the Special Fund Project of Qinghai Province for the Transformation of Scientific and Technological Achievements (2016-GX-109), and the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (2013112).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, J., Xie, Y., Wu, D. et al. Underestimating or overestimating the distribution inequality of research funding? The influence of funding sources and subdivision. Scientometrics 112, 55–74 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2402-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2402-2