Unveiling the impact and dual innovation of funded research

Abstract

In the relentless pursuit of scientific advancement, comprehending the profound impact and innovation nature inherent in funded research projects assumes paramount significance. To illuminate this matter, I delve into the realm of research supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The evaluative framework encompasses a spectrum of metrics, including citations by papers, patents, and Tweets, as markers of research impact. Moreover, I embrace ex-ante innovation (Novelty) and ex-post innovation (Disruption) as dual indispensable yardsticks for evaluating the innovative nature of research projects. Novelty denotes the manifestation of atypical combinations of existing knowledge, while Disruption signifies the extent of paradigm-shifting potential and the ability to exert a disruptive influence on future research endeavors. First, the analysis reveals that funded research projects manifest a conspicuously heightened impact in comparison to their non-funded counterparts. Second, I uncover a noteworthy finding: funded research demonstrates significantly higher levels of ex-ante innovation (Novelty). However, in a surprising twist, the impact of funding on ex-post innovation (Disruption) appears to be faint. Additionally, I undertake a meticulous scrutiny of the robustness of the research findings by scrutinizing patterns across years and fields. Despite the uneven distribution of NIH and NSF funded research and inconspicuous heterogeneity across fields, the patterns of the impact and dual innovation of funded research are consistent across almost all fields.