Item

Abstract

In an ideal world, funding agencies could identify the best scientists and projects and
provide them with the resources to undertake these projects. Most scientists would
agree that in practice, how funding for scientific research is allocated is far from
ideal and likely compromises research quality. We, nine evolutionary biologists from
different countries and career stages, provide a comparative summary of our impressions
on funding strategies for evolutionary biology across eleven different funding
agencies. We also assess whether and how funding effectiveness might be improved.
We focused this assessment on 14 elements within four broad categories: (a) topical
shaping of science, (b) distribution of funds, (c) application and review procedures,
and (d) incentives for mobility and diversity. These comparisons revealed striking
among‐country variation in those elements, including wide variation in funding rates,
the effort and burden required for grant applications, and the extent of emphasis
on societal relevance and individual mobility. We use these observations to provide
constructive suggestions for the future and urge the need to further gather informed
considerations from scientists on the effects of funding policies on science across
countries and research fields.