Research Councils UK (RCUK), the strategic partnership of the eight Research Councils, has today published the report of its project to study the efficiency and effectiveness of the peer review process and has launched a consultation on possible options for change.
The Research Council peer review system underpins the UK's world class research base. The Research Councils launched the study with a full commitment to peer review but with the aim of identifying ways to free up researchers' time to concentrate on their research and to cut red tape.
The report examined the cost in time and effort needed to support the peer review system both within the Research Councils and, through a survey conducted by consultants DTZ Pieda, within higher education institutions.
Findings from the report include:
- Peer review is effective at allocating funds and has underpinned the success of the UK’s research base. 93 per cent of university researchers believe that the peer review system is worthwhile despite the amount of effort involved.
- The work provides for the first time a robust estimate of the full economic cost of the peer review system in the UK. Within the Research Councils, the cost of administering the process is estimated to be £10 million each year and we calculate the upper limit of the annual cost to the research community of preparing and reviewing proposals and reports to be £186 million.
- Efforts to improve the efficiency of the peer review system should focus on the academic time needed to prepare and review proposals, and how it could be made more productive.
- The Research Councils’ peer review process compared favourably for efficiency when compared to other international grant awarding bodies.
- Applications to the Research Councils have doubled since 1988 causing average success rates to fall.
- Over two-thirds of university researchers and administrators rated the Research Council peer review process and the new Joint Electronic Submission (Je-S) system that supports it as excellent or good.
- The average success rate across the Research Councils is 28 per cent and at this level the system operates efficiently. However, with success rates falling and with some research areas under particular strain, it is timely to consider possible actions to ensure that the efficiency of peer review is not compromised.
The study has outlined a number of options that offer potential efficiency gains across the whole peer review system. The Research Councils have now launched a consultation with research organisations and learned and professional societies concerning how the principal options could or should be implemented or if other means should be examined. The consultation reflects the key role of the research community in ensuring an effective and efficient system.
The options the study found offered the greatest potential to improve efficiency in the peer review system are:
- Increasing the proportion of funding awarded using longer and/or larger grants.
- The introduction of institution-level quotas, either for all institutions or for those with particularly low success rates.
- Controlling re-submissions to limit the recycling of proposals within the system.
- Introducing an outline bid stage to the application process for responsive mode grants.
The consultation will run until January 2007.
Professor Ian Diamond, Chair of the RCUK Executive Group, said: "The Research Councils Peer Review process is an integral part of the system that has delivered the UK’s world-class research base. The use of peer review to determine funding has been shown to be highly effective and cost efficient. However, we need to examine whether there are any ways that we can free up more researchers’ time to concentrate on actual research rather than preparing grant applications."
Attila Emecz, RCUK Peer Review Project Leader, commented: "The project board has examined a variety of options to improve the efficiency of the peer review process. We now need to hear whether the research community think these options would deliver the enhancements to efficiency indicated by our modelling and how to achieve this without compromising effectiveness."
- ends -
Contact
Research Councils UK Press Office
Matt Goode
Tel: 01793 413299
Notes to Editors
Previous studies of the peer review process have been undertaken e.g. the Boden report 1990 and the Royal Society report 1995. The Research Councils’ project sought to relate its work to these studies.
About the Research Councils
The eight Research Councils are independent non-departmental public bodies, funded by the Science Budget through the Office of Science and Innovation.
They are incorporated by Royal Charter and together manage a research budget of over £2.5 billion a year.
Research Councils UK (RCUK) is the partnership between the UK's eight Research Councils. Through RCUK, the Research Councils work together to champion the research, training and innovation they support.
The partnership is led by the RCUK Executive Group, which meets monthly and comprises the chief executives of the eight Research Councils. The Group is currently chaired by Professor Ian Diamond, Chief Executive of the Economic and Social Research Council.
The Research Councils discuss and coordinate common interests on performance and evaluation through the RCUK Performance and Evaluation Group.
The eight UK Research Councils are:
- Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC);
- Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC);
- Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC);
- Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC);
- Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC);
- Medical Research Council (MRC);
- Natural Environment Research Council (NERC);
- Particle Physics & Astronomy Research Council (PPARC).