Global Public Health (forthcoming)

Joseph Millum
University of St. Andrews
Most public and non-profit organisations that fund health research provide the majority of their funding in the form of grants. The calls for grant applications are often untargeted, such that a wide variety of applications may compete for the same funding. The grant review process therefore plays a critical role in determining how limited research resources are allocated. Despite this, little attention has been paid to whether grant review criteria align with widely endorsed ethical criteria for allocating health research resources. Here, we analyse the criteria and processes that ten of the largest public and non-profit research funders use to choose between competing grant applications. Our data suggest that research funders rarely instruct reviewers to consider disease burden or to prioritise research for sicker or more disadvantaged populations, and typically only include scientists in the review processes. This is liable to undermine efforts to link research funding to health needs.
Keywords priority setting  resource allocation  research funding  grant review  ethics
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ethical Issues in Funding Orphan Drug Research and Development.C. A. Gericke - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (3):164-168.
Funding and Forums for ELSI Research: Who (or What) Is Setting the Agenda?Clair Morrissey & Rebecca Walker - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics Primary Research 3 (3):41-50.
Peer Review and Innovation.Raymond Spier - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (1):99-108.


Added to PP index

Total views
97 ( #114,225 of 2,462,067 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
66 ( #11,986 of 2,462,067 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes