Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The importance of “seed” research funds in science and technology an Australian case study

  • Published:
The Australian Educational Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The 1980s have witnessed a growing concern by governments in many western countries that the research finding agencies which they support are accountable/or what is funded and can demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness of their operations. However, despite the reports regarding the operations of for example, the National Science Foundation in the United States and the Research Councils in the United Kingdom there is very little readily available information on the operations of those agencies or Programs responsible for the allocation of “seed funds”. This article reports the results of a survey which investigated how one such Program in Australia has been meeting both its own aims as well as the needs of its grant recipients in relation to collaborative international science and technology projects. The findings show an overwhelming support for the Program and identify many tangible examples of how a little money can go a long way. Furthermore, one of the main points made by grant recipients is that the Program is complementary to, rather than a supplement for the other Australian research funding schemes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, Joe (1989).New Approaches to Evaluation in UK Research Funding Agencies, Concept Paper No.9, (London, Science Policy Support Group).

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Science and Technology Council (1989).Profile of Australian Science. (Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boden, Margaret (1990).Peer Review. A report to the Advisory Board for the Research Councils from the Working Group on Peer Review. (London, HMSO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawke, R.J.L. and Jones, B.E. (1989).Science and Technology for Australia: statement by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Science, Customs and Small business and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Science and Technology, (Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service).

    Google Scholar 

  • Higher Education: a Policy Statement (1988) Circulated by The Hon. J.S. Dawkins, MP Minister for Employment, Education and Training. (Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (1990).Report of the Merit Review Task Force, August 23. (Washington DC., NSF).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Fiona Q. Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David C. Nicholls
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Lynn Meek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wood, F.Q., Nicholls, D.C. & Meek, V.L. The importance of “seed” research funds in science and technology an Australian case study. Aust. Educ. Res. 20, 83–100 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03219553

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03219553

Keywords

Search

Navigation