Canada’s research funding agencies must experiment to keep up with evolving science landscape: Council of Canadian Academies report

Canada's research funding agencies need to experiment with new funding approaches to keep up with the evolving scientific landscape, says the chair of a new expert panel report by the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA).

“The field of science, engineering and mathematics is changing, not just in Canada but the international landscape. It’s important for funding agencies to evolve with those changing landscapes,” panel chair Dr. Shirley M. Tilghman told Research Money.

The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) asked the CCA in early 2020 for an evidence-based, independent assessment of successful international practices for funding natural sciences and engineering research and how these could be applied in Canada.

The CCA released its report, “Powering Discovery,” by an eight-member expert panel on May 4.

Changes impacting the natural sciences and engineering fields, as well as other disciplines, include a sense of “hyper-competition” for research funding that is particularly affecting young investigators, said Tilghman, president emeritus of Princeton University in New Jersey and a professor of molecular biology and public affairs.

While there is more competition for less funding, there is also a greater dependence on multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary science, which often involves significant funding requests for equipment and larger research teams, she said.

NSERC and other Canadian funding agencies could do some experiments with funding approaches that respond to such changes and make the funding more effective, Tilghman said.

For example, the expert panel noted that in Europe, the Netherlands and the European Research Council are experimenting with research awards segmented by career stage and pots of funding available.

With such an approach, early career investigators are competing for funding with other early career researchers, and likewise for mid-career and senior investigators.

“We felt that did give early and mid-career investigators a better chance to attract funding, but as importantly give the funding agencies opportunities to make sure that the workforce has balance between those three important career stages,” Tilghman said.

Funding agencies also need to be prepared for the fact that they’re being asked to take on a greater role than simply evaluating the science and then providing grants, she said. “They’re being asked to take positions on, for example, the importance of open science and open access [to research results].”

Many funding agencies are in the process of requiring that research which is published using their funds is published in open-access journals, she added.

Funding agencies are also paying much more attention to the diversity of the scientific workforce, Tilghman said. “They are putting both carrots and sticks, frankly, in place to encourage institutions to diversify the workforce,” she said.

The COVID pandemic has exacerbated existing inequalities within the research community, “and highlighted the challenge funders face in attempting to balance immediate needs with preserving support for fundamental, curiosity-driven research,” according to the panel’s report.

Research Money will take an in-depth look at the CCA’s 176-page report, including further comments Dr. Tilghman, in our next issue of Innovation This Week on May 12.

R$