Average number of reported articles, EKs, and HS-EK per PI of research project in each GiA category.

(A) The number of published articles and EKs in the past 3 years before funding began, within 3 years after funding began, and within 4 to 6 years after funding began. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2013. (B) The number of published HS-EKs in the past 3 years before funding began, within 3 years after funding began, and within 4 to 6 years after funding began. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2004. (A)(B) X and Y axes show the range of grant amount and averages with standard deviations, respectively. All amounts are in Japanese yen.</p

Grants-in-Aid investigated in this study.

Understanding the effectiveness of public funds to generate emerging topics will assist policy makers in promoting innovation. In the present study, we aim to clarify the effectiveness of grants to generate emerging topics in life sciences and medicine since 1991 with regard to Japanese researcher productivity and grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. To clarify how large grant amounts and which categories are more effective in generating emerging topics from both the PI and investment perspectives, we analyzed awarded PI publications containing emerging keywords (EKs; the elements of emerging topics) before and after funding. Our results demonstrated that, in terms of grant amounts, while PIs tended to generate more EKs with larger grants, the most effective investment from the perspective of investor side was found in the smallest amount range for each PI (less than 5 million JPY /year). Second, in terms of grant categories, we found that grant categories providing smaller amounts for diverse researchers without excellent past performance records were more effective from the investment perspective to generate EK. Our results suggest that offering smaller, widely dispersed grants rather than large, concentrated grants is more effective in promoting the generation of emerging topics in life science and medicine.</div

Total invested cost by JSPS vs total number of articles, EKs, and HS-EKs reported by PIs.

(A) Total number of published articles and EKs within 6 years after funding began. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2013. X and Y axes show total invested cost and total number of reported articles and EKs. Solid and dashed lines represent linear fit from under 1 million JPY/project, 1–2 million JPY/project and 2–5 million JPY/project of the number of published articles and EKs, respectively. (B) Total number of published HS-EKs within 6 years after funding began is shown. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2004. X and Y axes show total invested cost and total number of reported HS-EKs. Solid lines represent linear fit from under 1 million JPY/project, 1–2 million JPY/project and 2–5 million JPY/project of the number of published HS-EKs. All amounts are in Japanese yen.</p

Proportion of new application acceptance.

Understanding the effectiveness of public funds to generate emerging topics will assist policy makers in promoting innovation. In the present study, we aim to clarify the effectiveness of grants to generate emerging topics in life sciences and medicine since 1991 with regard to Japanese researcher productivity and grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. To clarify how large grant amounts and which categories are more effective in generating emerging topics from both the PI and investment perspectives, we analyzed awarded PI publications containing emerging keywords (EKs; the elements of emerging topics) before and after funding. Our results demonstrated that, in terms of grant amounts, while PIs tended to generate more EKs with larger grants, the most effective investment from the perspective of investor side was found in the smallest amount range for each PI (less than 5 million JPY /year). Second, in terms of grant categories, we found that grant categories providing smaller amounts for diverse researchers without excellent past performance records were more effective from the investment perspective to generate EK. Our results suggest that offering smaller, widely dispersed grants rather than large, concentrated grants is more effective in promoting the generation of emerging topics in life science and medicine.</div

Total invested cost by JSPS vs. total number of reported articles, EKs, and HS-EKs by all PIs of a particular grant category.

The X axis shows total number of published (A) articles, (B) EKs, and (C) HS-EKs within 6 years after funding began and the Y axis shows total invested costs (millions JPY). The data includes grants beginning from (A)(B) 1991 to 2013, and (C)1991 to 2004. Dashed lines represent linear fit from all the points. Abbreviations are the same as Fig 6.</p

Research fields targeted in this study.

Understanding the effectiveness of public funds to generate emerging topics will assist policy makers in promoting innovation. In the present study, we aim to clarify the effectiveness of grants to generate emerging topics in life sciences and medicine since 1991 with regard to Japanese researcher productivity and grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. To clarify how large grant amounts and which categories are more effective in generating emerging topics from both the PI and investment perspectives, we analyzed awarded PI publications containing emerging keywords (EKs; the elements of emerging topics) before and after funding. Our results demonstrated that, in terms of grant amounts, while PIs tended to generate more EKs with larger grants, the most effective investment from the perspective of investor side was found in the smallest amount range for each PI (less than 5 million JPY /year). Second, in terms of grant categories, we found that grant categories providing smaller amounts for diverse researchers without excellent past performance records were more effective from the investment perspective to generate EK. Our results suggest that offering smaller, widely dispersed grants rather than large, concentrated grants is more effective in promoting the generation of emerging topics in life science and medicine.</div

Average number of reported articles, EKs, and HS-EK per PI of research project according to grant size range.

(A) The number of published articles and EKs in the past 3 years before funding began, within 3 years after funding began, and within 4 to 6 years after funding began. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2013. When comparing the values of the before and after periods within each category, both the number of research papers and the number of EKs show p < 0.01. (B) The number of published HS-EKs in the past 3 years before funding began, within 3 years after funding began, and within 4 to 6 years after funding began. The data includes grants beginning from 1991 to 2004. (A)(B) X and Y axes show the range of grant amount and averages with standard deviations, respectively. All amounts are in Japanese yen.</p

Effectiveness of Investment (EI) to generate emerging topics estimated by data from 1991 to 2004.

Effectiveness of Investment (EI) to generate emerging topics estimated by data from 1991 to 2004.</p

Schematic model of the generation process of ETs, modified from Ohniwa et al. 2019 [4].

Lowercase letters (a to o) indicate the elements of life science topics that are represented by MeSH terms. Uppercase letters (A and B) indicate the newly appeared elements of new ETs. ETα to ETζ represent distinct ETs. Each ET is composed of various elements representing materials, phenomena and processes, diseases, techniques, devices, etc. A certain ET in a certain period evolves into a different ET by dropping and acquiring different elements over time. For example, ETα in Period I changes into ETβ in Period II by dropping off elements b and c and acquiring elements d and e, which are not the elements of ETs in Period I. Certain elements may also recruit other elements to generate new ETs. Element c in ETα in Period I recruits element g to generate distinct ETγ in Period II, for instance. Newly appeared elements also sometimes generate novel ETs. For example, in Period II, element A appears and generates ETδ together with existing element i.</p

Average of total received cost per PI of each research project vs. average number of articles, EKs, and HS-EKs reported by the PI.

The X axis shows average number of published (A) articles, (B) EKs and (C) HS-EKs within 6 years after funding began and the Y axis shows the average of total received cost per PI of each research project (millions JPY). The data includes grants beginning from (A)(B) 1991 to 2013, and (C)1991 to 2004. Dashed lines represent linear fit from all the points. Abbreviations represent the following. COE; GiA for COE research, SR(S); GiA for Scientific Research (S), SR(A); GiA for Scientific Research (A), SR(B); GiA for Scientific Research (B), SR(C); GiA for Scientific Research (C), CER; GiAs for Exploratory Research, YS; GiAs for Young Scientists, SRI; GiAs for Scientific Research on Innovation, SRPA; GiAs for Scientific Research on Priority Areas, SPR; GiA for Specially Promoted Research, ES; GiAs for Encouragement of Scientists, RAS; GiA for Research Activity Start-up, CR(A); GiA for Co-operative Research (A), CR(B); GiA for Co-operative Research (B), GSR(A); GiA for General Scientific Research (A), GSR(B); GiA for General Scientific Research (B), GSR(C); GiA for General Scientific Research (C), DSR; GiAs for Development Scientific Research, CR; GiA for Cancer Research.</p