Christine Winterbourn: Scientific talent under threat

Following the announcement of the recipients of Marsden Fund research grants there has been an outcry of allegations of favouritism by the Marsden Council in allocating funds to its advisory panel members. It has also been unjustifiably criticised over the projects selected for funding and the use of taxpayers' money.

About 6 per cent of the total government science budget of $650 million is allocated to the Marsden Fund. It supports ground-breaking research by the country's top scientists and covers the full range of disciplines.

Only applications of exceptional quality are funded. They must be based on excellent ideas, have an innovative design, and build on a track record of achievement by the applicant. The type of research funded is published in international journals and makes our scientists and scholars world class.

The Marsden Fund is woefully small. The $38 million is spread thinly over the full spectrum of scientific and academic disciplines. Of the 722 standard applications received this year, only 52 were funded.

A typical grant is about $250,000 a year for three years. The funding pays for scientists and postgraduate students employed to work on the project. It must also cover scientific equipment, chemicals and other materials, as well as overheads like laboratories and offices, library resources and IT.

The outcry is because some of this year's grants were awarded to current panellists. This has been happening since the inception of the Marsden Fund. Sitting in judgment over your peers is the way of life for scientists. Decisions about what research is funded and what is published must be informed by experts. By necessity these are colleagues or are known to the applicants. Any conflicts of interest are well recognised and Marsden has well-established procedures to ensure the process is fair.

At Marsden, preliminary applications for funding are assessed by one of nine panels made up of about eight leading researchers from throughout New Zealand. They are scored by panel members and the top-ranked 20-25 per cent progress to a full application.

For the second stage, more detailed proposals are submitted. They are assessed by three international experts. Each panel member uses these reports, plus a response from the applicant to grade each proposal. Grades are collated to give a preliminary overall ranking which is finalised at a subsequent panel meeting. The top ranked applications are recommended to the Marsden Council for approval.

To avoid conflicts of interest, no panellist scores their own grant, nor are they present when it is discussed, or aware of how it ranks. Applications from colleagues of panellists also represent potential conflicts and are handled similarly. As a final check, an independent councillor oversees the process.

Even with these checks, it is preferable to avoid perceptions of conflicts of interest, so the Marsden Council has decided to trial a system in which councillors and panellists cannot apply for grants.

It remains to be seen if it will work. Panellists are chosen from our most distinguished and active scientists, the people who seek Marsden funding to support their research. Many of these will not forgo applying for funds to be on a panel.

Also, with at least 2000 investigators named on grant applications each year, this constitutes a significant proportion of the academic community. To find 72 suitably expert panel members from outside this group will be a big challenge.

The process has come under attack because of the inadequacy of funding and low success rate. For every seven happily funded researchers, 93 are disappointed. It is not surprising that some vent their anger on the system.

Numerous reports have concluded that New Zealand's investment in this research is far too low. Up-and-coming scientists are becoming disillusioned because it is so hard to succeed in the tight Marsden system.

We risk losing their talent from science and the country. Doubling Marsden funding would change frustration to enthusiasm and provide a boost for fundamental research.

* Professor Christine Winterbourn is a member of the Marsden Fund Council and heads a biomedical research group at the Christchurch School of Medicine, University of Otago.