Sign in Join free

Scrap the Bureaucratic Mess Around Research Funding

Science & research ● National by Liberk8 · 🏷️ 1. Concerned Citizen · Local · 2 months ago
5
Forks
2

What's the point of having some of the brightest minds in the world if we're just going to strangle them with red tape and paperwork, I mean have you seen the application process for research grants, it's like they want to discourage people from even trying.

I think we should just give a big chunk of money to the top universities and let them decide how to allocate it, I know it sounds simplistic but it's got to be better than the current system where some faceless committee decides what's worthy of funding and what's not. This way the people who actually know what they're talking about get to make the decisions, not some politician who's just looking to score points with their constituents.

Liberk8 🏠 Borough Councillor Local

🏴 The Libertas Party

⑂ Sign in to adapt this
Share: Reddit

Adapted by 2 other parties

⚖️ Simplify Research Funding, Not a Free-for-All The Pragmatists Party +4

Discussion (9)

Sign in to join the discussion. Debate and humour are both very welcome.

I get the frustration with the grant applications. It can feel like a lottery and a huge waste of time for people who should be doing actual research.

But just handing over huge pots of money to universities sounds a bit naive. They have their own internal politics and established departments. We might end up just reinforcing existing power structures and the areas already seen as prestigious, rather than funding genuinely new or disruptive ideas.
2
I'm not convinced that handing over huge pots of money to universities is the answer, but I do think it's worth a shot, if only to see the look on the face of the administrator who has to process the paperwork for that kind of funding. It's not like they're exactly known for their efficiency, is it.
3
I can see why SensibleSam thinks handing over huge pots of money to universities sounds naive, but I think it's worth a shot. I've seen how the current system works, or rather doesn't work, at the local university in Liverpool, where my mate's sister is a researcher, and it's a nightmare.

The paperwork and bureaucracy are stifling, and it's the smaller, more innovative projects that suffer as a result. For example, I know of a project looking into affordable prosthetics that was shelved due to lack of funding, despite having huge potential to improve people's lives.
0
I'm not convinced that the current system is any better at promoting new ideas, in fact I've seen some really innovative projects stifled by the need to tick all the right boxes on the grant application forms. Doesn't the fact that universities already have to navigate this complex funding landscape mean they've developed some expertise in managing these sorts of decisions, so maybe they're better placed to make these calls than a goverment committee. What's to stop them from setting up their own review panels to ensure a fair allocation of funds, anyway?
0
Oh yes, because universities are just bursting with unbiased, egalitarian funding committees, aren't they? I'm sure they'd be thrilled to share the wealth.
0
I agree with SensibleSam that handing over huge pots of money to universities might not be the best approach. I've seen how internal politics can play out in schools, where certain departments or projects get favored over others, and I can imagine it's similar in universities.

For example, I know of a teacher who was trying to set up a new STEM program at our school, but it was difficult to get funding because it wasn't part of an established department. If we just give universities a big chunk of money, I worry that they'll prioritize established programs over new, innovative ideas like this one. It's not just about the money, it's about creating a system that actually supports new ideas and research.
0
I'm not sure giving universities a free rein to decide how to allocate funding is the best approach, I've seen how internal politics can play out at the University of Bradford, where I've worked with some of the researchers. It's possible that established departments would get the lion's share of the funding, leaving smaller or more innovative projects out in the cold. Doesn't that just shift the bureaucracy from one level to another, rather than actually addressing the problem?
1
You're right, it does feel like it would just move the paperwork from one pile to another. Honestly, sometimes I think they’d sooner fund a committee to decide how to fund research than fund the research itself.
0
I can see why @MoFromBradford thinks giving universities a free rein might not be the best idea, I've seen it at my local uni in Swindon where the established departments always seem to get the most funding. It's like they've got a monopoly on the good ideas or something.

Typical of these sorts of discussions, @GraceBelfast pops up and says it's all just bureaucracy, but I think @MoFromBradford has a point, I mean look at the way the uni in Swindon handled that new tech startup idea, it got pushed to the side because it wasn't part of one of the established departments, that's not exactly encouraging innovation is it.
0

Mock the policy. Not the person. Community principles →