Promoting diversity in science in Japan through mission-oriented research grants

In this study, we quantitatively compared the impact of mission-oriented research grants and curiosity-driven grants on the diversity of research subjects in Japan. First, we examined data for Japanese principal investigators receiving research funding between 2000 and 2010 in the field of nanotechnology and materials science, and identified groups of researchers whose publication performance was positively affected by the mission-oriented grant, CREST. We then compared the effect of CREST with that of the curiosity-driven grant, KAKENHI. The analysis uses both propensity score matching and difference in differences (PSM-DID) methodologies. Our results show that for participants in the CREST program there was an increase in number of publications of more than 10% per year, for periods of both 5 and 3 years after the funding ended, even though the observed average effect on citation was not statistically significant. Second, we evaluated the diversity of research subjects through analysis of the distribution of the classification codes applied to articles published between 1996 and 2013, utilizing the J-Global database, which has the finest granularity of category among existing bibliographic scientific publication databases. Research subjects were better conserved under the mission-oriented program than the curiosity-driven one, a finding contrary to predictions of conventional theory. We also found that under mission-oriented funding, there was an increase in diversity in the sense of marginal utility. These findings should be of use in the “diversity-aware” design of programs for the funding of fundamental research.

[1]  Masatsura Igami,et al.  Decreasing diversity in Japanese science, evidence from in-depth analyses of science maps , 2015, Scientometrics.

[2]  W. Stahel,et al.  Log-normal Distributions across the Sciences: Keys and Clues , 2001 .

[3]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  Takashi Kitai Construction of JICST Scientific Technological Classification 1993 , 1993 .

[5]  R. Cowan Tortoises and Hares: Choice among Technologies of Unknown Merit , 1991 .

[6]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience , 2009, Scientometrics.

[7]  Mark Matthews,et al.  Reconciling diversity and scale: some questions of method in the assessment of the costs and benefits of European intégration , 1992 .

[8]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Creativity in scientific teams: : Unpacking novelty and impact , 2015 .

[9]  J. Hicks,et al.  The economics of science , 1996 .

[10]  O. Williamson Transaction Cost Economics and Organization Theory , 1993 .

[11]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Uncertainty and technological change , 1996 .

[12]  J. Jacobs,et al.  The Economy of Cities , 1969 .

[13]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[14]  Brian A. Jacob,et al.  The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity , 2007, Journal of public economics.

[15]  Frank Havemann,et al.  Measuring Diversity of Research by Extracting Latent Themes from Bipartite Networks of Papers and References , 2008 .

[16]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[17]  Franz Barjak,et al.  Team diversity and research collaboration in life sciences teams: Does a combination of research cultures pay off? , 2006 .

[18]  A. Elzinga The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1997 .

[19]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[20]  Michael Gibbons,et al.  Science's new social contract with society , 1999, Nature.

[21]  Scott Stern,et al.  Clusters, Convergence, and Economic Performance , 2010 .

[22]  R. Merton The Normative Structure of Science , 1973 .

[23]  Diana Hicks,et al.  Equity and Excellence in Research Funding , 2011 .

[24]  David F. Channell Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1999 .

[25]  Frank Havemann,et al.  A Methodological Study for Measuring the Diversity of Science , 2006 .

[26]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Measuring diversity in disciplinary collaboration in research teams: An ecological perspective , 2016 .

[27]  Sotaro Shibayama,et al.  Distribution of academic research funds: a case of Japanese national research grant , 2011, Scientometrics.

[28]  Jennifer M Talarico,et al.  A review of 40 years of research , 2018 .

[29]  Pedro Albarrán,et al.  The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates , 2010, Scientometrics.

[30]  Norman Kaplan,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .

[31]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  Stylized Facts in the Geography of Innovation , 2010 .

[32]  A. Stirling A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society , 2007, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[33]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Text Mining for Science and Technology – A Review Part I – Characterization/ Scientometrics , 2012, J. Sci. Res..