September 18, 2009
re: “But how to persuade government and the public that scientists should simply be given money for research?“

Dr. Peter A. Lawrence
Department of Zoology
University of Cambridge
pal@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk

Dr. Mike Glazer
Professor - Department of Physics
University of Oxford
glazer@physics.ox.ac.uk
Dear Peter & Mike,

Dear Peter & Mike,
Well written article and good comments in the boxes, respectively, but you hedge by trying to reform rather than replace the system. The snakes will just grow back.

Here in Canada we in the Canadian Association for Responsible Research Funding (http://post.queensu.ca/~f...) have written many peer reviewed articles and even a book on how to change things, over the past 4 decades. I could send you a long list. But the latest, by me and Bryan Poulin, seems to have struck a chord:

Gordon, R. & B.J. Poulin (2009). Cost of the NSERC science grant peer review system exceeds the cost of giving every qualified researcher a baseline grant. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance 16(1), 1-28; 16(4), 232-233.
http://www.informaworld.c...
http://www.informaworld.c...

The title says it all, and the public understands waste of their tax money.
Yours, -Dick Gordon

Dear Dick

thanks for writing, I am receiving so many letters! Would you consider making your points online in the PLoS Biology journal (there is a link for comments by the article on their site) where I am keen to start a public debate on these issues?

Canada seems to be the one country i have heard about that has a more sensible system of research funding.

all the best, Peter

Dear Peter,
I think you suffer from “the grass is always greener on the other side” syndrome. We really need to convene a conference on “Comparative Science Granting Systems” to get the wool out of our eyes. How about at U. Cambridge?
Yours, -Dick Gordon (gordonr@cc.umanitoba.ca)