,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
1. A research enterprise serving the needs of its jurisdiction needs both open and strategic competitions (especially for applied health). See UK NIHR as shining example of strategic funding program generating excellent science.
2. Rationale for strategic funding is fundamentally about generating knowledge that addresses key jurisdictional priorities. Rationale for Foundation scheme was PI and funder convenience - not the same at all.
3. I do not think there is any intrinsic reasons why strategic programs in general should lead to gender inequalities (is there any evidence that other strategic funding competitions (eg NIHR) result in gender inequality).
4. I am not arguing with the numbers but IMHO we need to look at the strategic competitions and find ways of overcoming these inequalities rather than saying we should scrap this important funding mechanism.
5. Agree with @jwoodgett that current way of designing Strategic competitions could be better.
