$25.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Buy Article:


Recent governmental programs to invest in science and technology as a countermeasure to the economic downturn promise an unparalleled incentive for basic research but may also result in thousands of additional research proposals submitted to national research councils. The unprecedented magnitude of these investments represents a challenge for the organizations that implement them and justifies that international peer review procedures are the preferred method for evaluation of the proposals. This study presents the perspective of the Human Frontier Science Program (HFSP) as an example for the successful conduct of international peer review. The HFSP operates a small funding program to support intercontinental collaboration and training in the basic life sciences. The program funds international, interdisciplinary, and innovative projects by encouraging novel collaborations of scientists from biology and neighboring disciplines. Because of its global reach, international peer review procedures and the rigorous selection of HFSP awards are essential for its success. Diversity at the reviewer level in terms of nationalities and scientific expertise reduces the risk of conflicts of interest and assures fair evaluation of academic track records. During the selection process reviewers should follow clear criteria so as to build up credibility and reputation.

Keywords: Basic research; Conflict of interest; Funding organization; International collaboration; Peer review

Document Type: Research Article


Affiliations: , Strasbourg,

Publication date: March 1, 2010

Related content



Share Content

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more