Environmental News

Overview:

USA National Science Foundation funded research totaling $USD 8.49 billion in 2021, of which $USD 819 million (9.6%) went to biological research. Environmental biology grant funding rate was 24%.

China National Science Foundation funded research totaling 31.2 billion yuan (equivalent to $USD 4.84 billion) in 2021, of which $USD 270 million (5.6%) went to biological research. In more recent years, research funding has increased more rapidly in China than USA, so this ‘gap’ is closing overall. Biology grant funding rate was 21%.

Details:

Over time I have been involved with successful and unsuccessful research proposals in both places. USA NSF proposals need to be much more lengthy. Both require justifications in terms of benefits to society beyond ‘we will learn new interesting things’ and ‘we will publish research’. Neither asks for or expects justifications in terms of benefits to the respective ruling governments. That would not be science.

A notable difference between these proposal-review systems is that in USA, reviews rejecting NSF proposals always provide constructive criticism/suggestions on how to improve proposals (for future), while in China those are not provided. I see this as incomplete use of proposal reviewers’ expertise here, and a bit of a fail in the overall process.

I have participated some NSF proposal reviews in USA, but have never been asked to in China. An N=1 thing with nothing more implied.

Stopping research grants from either country would be exceptional; could happen if some promised ‘deliverables’ were not delivered I guess. There is now a whiff that USA NSF grants could be stopped if a new ideology is not adhered to. Find for yourselves concerns that USA NSF grantees may be feeling about that.

If more revelations are desired, please be specific and I will consider them.

 

National Nature Assessment

After Trump killed a report on nature, researchers push ahead with release - Ars Technica