Abstract
Biomedical science in the Netherlands and other continental European countries is lagging behind scientific research in English-speaking countries. A comparison between the two systems reveals several crucial differences. Although levels of government funding of scientific research are approximately equal, the rigid, non-quality-based funding system of continental universities compares badly with the flexible quality-based funding systems in the USA and the UK. The rigid, hierarchical organisation and indistinct career structure that are found in the continental European system lead to problems in funding strategy and a lack of independence among young researchers. Moreover, equalized funding by national governments to state universities has hampered the creation of centres of excellence. It is proposed that the broad introduction of a peer-review-based funding system would solve these problems and would put European science back on its feet.
| Translated title of the contribution | Improving the health of scientific research in the Netherlands |
|---|---|
| Original language | Dutch |
| Pages (from-to) | 1608-1611 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde |
| Volume | 149 |
| Issue number | 29 |
| Publication status | Published - 16 Jul 2005 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Improving the health of scientific research in the Netherlands'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver