4 ms·
Are they? A significant number of the major papers published over the last several years in the field I'm currently in have European co-authors. Having witnes
by zhdc1 8y ago
Are they?
A significant number of the major papers published over the last several years in the field I'm currently in have European co-authors. Having witnessed how EC funding works first hand, I'm willing to go to bat that it's a major reason behind the current renaissance in European university research.
EC grants have regular reporting requirements with metrics and dissemination plans that are used to inform future awards. They also intentionally hold back a large portion of the promised funding to enforce compliance, and hold regular audits.
I can't speak for the Marie Curie action awards first hand, but defections from academia to industry are prevalent across the board, and are generally a good thing (you want academia to inform industry, and vice versa). There are also a very limited number of open positions from post-doc on up.
- borroka 8y agoERA grants vary widely in prestige, money, and requirements. It is correct that they hold back money that is freed after audits are carried out. However, as in the case of the MC fellowship, which can amount to > 300k over three years (so not beer money), you can write whatever you want in the reports and never hear back from your liaison officer. "Defections" from academia to industry are prevalent and logical, since for one there are many more jobs there than in academia. However, MC fellowships are explicitly meant to support researchers and their research, train them, and then bring back knowledge and talent to EU research Institutions. Having a very high percentage of MC fellows leave academia after the end of the fellowship defeats their purpose and waste money and talent.