Section Navigation
National Competitive Grants Program
Breadcrumb Navigation
Linkage Projects
Round 1
Selection Report for Funding Commencing in 2010
Overview
Selection Process
Selection Criteria
Funding Levels and Duration
Approved Funding
Project Size
Components
APAI and APAI-IT
APDI
LIF
Outcomes by Administering Organisation
Partnerships
Leverage of ARC Funding
International Collaboration
Age and Gender
National Research Priorities
Rural and Regional
Summary of Outcomes
Overview
The Linkage Projects scheme funds collaborative projects between university researchers and Partner Organisations. Proposals in Round One for projects commencing in January 2010 opened on 18 March 2009, and closed on 20 May 2009. This report outlines recommendations from the selection process for that round.
As indicated in the funding rules for this round, Linkage Projects aims to:
- encourage and develop long-term strategic research alliances between higher education organisations and other organisations, including within industry and end-users, in order to apply advanced knowledge to problems and/or to provide opportunities to obtain national economic, social or cultural benefits;
- support collaborative research on issues of benefit to regional and rural communities;
- enhance the scale and focus of research in National Research Priorities;
- foster opportunities for postdoctoral researchers to pursue internationally competitive research in collaboration with organisations outside the higher education sector, targeting those who have demonstrated a clear commitment to high-quality research;
- provide outcome-oriented research training to prepare high-calibre postgraduate research students; and
- produce a national pool of world-class researchers to meet the needs of the broader Australian innovation system.
Linkage Projects provides funding support for:
- Australian Postdoctoral Fellowships Industry (APDI) for researchers with less than three years postdoctoral experience;
- Australian Postgraduate Awards Industry (APAI, or as APAI-IT for those in the field of information technology and communications) for postgraduate research students studying towards a Masters or PhD degree; and
- Linkage Industry Fellowships (LIF) which provide support for costs involved in a temporary transfer from one of the eligible higher education organisations listed on a proposal to one of the partner organisations on that proposal, or vice versa.
A single Linkage Projects proposal may contain research project costs and/or one or more of the component costs above. This report provides summary statistics for Linkage Projects proposals that involve project, and/or APAI, and/or APDI, and/or LIF funding.
Selection Process
The closing date for Linkage Projects proposals was 20 May 2009. Assessment of proposals was under the direction of the ARC Executive Directors, who:
- assigned independent readers/assessors in conjunction with the College of Experts to review the proposals;
- sought applicants’ comments on assessors’ reports;
- identified eligibility issues;
- supported the College of Experts in ranking each proposal relative to the others on the basis of the proposal, the assessors’ reports and applicants’ responses to those assessments;
- in conjunction with the College of Experts assessed and recommend budgets; and
- prepared funding recommendations for submission to the Minister for the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research.
Selection Criteria
Selection criteria and corresponding weights for Linkage Projects proposals are:
- investigator track record (20%)
- significance and innovation (25%)
- approach and training (20%)
- national benefit (10%)
- commitment of partner organisation (25%).
Funding Levels and Duration
Funding for Linkage Projects may be awarded for one to five years subject to parliamentary appropriation and the provisions of the ARC Act. APDIs are awarded for a standard duration of three years, except where applicants specifically request a shorter duration. APAI stipends may be awarded for two years (Masters) or three years (PhD), with provision under certain conditions for an extension of an additional six months’ support for PhD students. Unless otherwise specified, funding amounts presented in this document do not include amounts covering six-month extensions for APAI stipends.
Approved Funding
Of the 470 Linkage Projects proposals considered, 211 (44.9%) are approved for funding and represent an ARC commitment of $66.83 million over the life of these Projects.
Table 1: Numbers of proposals and success rates for Linkage Projects Round One 2010 by discipline panel
Panel* |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Requested funds over project life (all proposals considered) |
Approved funds over project life (approved proposals) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSB |
103 |
44 |
42.7% |
$49,095,379 |
$18,561,793 |
EE |
98 |
44 |
44.9% |
$38,857,936 |
$12,192,807 |
HCA |
44 |
19 |
43.2% |
$11,062,686 |
$4,233,951 |
MIC |
54 |
24 |
44.4% |
$24,442,370 |
$9,177,983 |
PCE |
24 |
13 |
54.2% |
$11,198,296 |
$4,455,562 |
SBE |
147 |
67 |
45.6% |
$43,843,854 |
$18,205,795 |
Total |
470 |
211 |
44.9% |
$178,500,521 |
$66,827,891 |
*BSB = Biological Sciences and Biotechnology; EE = Engineering and Environmental Sciences; HCA = Humanities and Creative Arts; MIC = Mathematics, Information and Communication Sciences; PCE = Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences; SBE = Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences
Project Size
The average first year funding allocation for approved Round One 2010 Linkage Projects is $104,265 which represents 71.6 per cent of the average first year request. The average first year funding allocation has increased from $96,131 in Round One 2007 to $104,265 in Round One 2010.
The average funding allocation over the Project life for approved Round One 2010 Linkage Projects is $316,720 which represents 70.6 per cent of the average request. The average funding allocation over the Project life has increased from $285,745 in Round One 2007 to $316,270 in Round One 2010.
Table 2: Comparison of the average first year funding allocation and the average funding allocation over the Project life for approved Linkage Projects from Round One 2007 to Round One 2010
| 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
Rd 2 |
Rd 1 |
|
Average year 1 request |
$110,737 |
$130,161 |
$130,051 |
$129,088 |
$144,942 |
$154,573 |
$141,563 |
$145,626 |
Average year 1 allocation |
$87,217 |
$96,131 |
$92,157 |
$103,942 |
$100,952 |
$110,082 |
$101,251 |
$104,265 |
% Allocation |
78.8% |
73.9% |
70.9% |
80.5% |
69.6% |
71.2% |
71.5% |
71.6% |
Average project life request |
$343,242 |
$404,557 |
$417,241 |
$388,846 |
$449,110 |
$486,387 |
$438,181 |
$448,434 |
Average project life allocation |
$262,040 |
$285,745 |
$277,940 |
$308,257 |
$306,332 |
$328,921 |
$300,656 |
$316,720 |
% Allocation |
76.3% |
70.6% |
66.6% |
79.3% |
68.2% |
67.6% |
68.6% |
70.6% |
Components
The components that can be funded in Linkage Projects are APAIs, APAI‑ITs, APDIs and LIFs. The following table shows numbers requested and success rates for these components.
Table 3: Numbers of and success rates for Linkage Projects Round One 2010 components
Component |
Number requested |
Number approved |
Success rate |
|---|---|---|---|
APAI |
328 |
123 |
37.5% |
APAI_IT |
48 |
22 |
45.8% |
APDI |
41 |
15 |
36.6% |
LIF |
0 |
0 |
- |
APAI and APAI_IT
The 2010 Linkage Projects Funding Rules stipulate that, subject to an adequate number of requests of the requisite type and of sufficient quality being received, the ARC will allocate at least 50 APAI places in the field of information technology and communications in addition to other APAI funding. These APAI-IT places are to be filled over both selection rounds. For this round (Round One 2010), 123 APAI and 22 APAI-IT places are approved for funding, representing success rates of 37.5 per cent and 45.8 per cent respectively.
APDI
The Linkage Projects Round One 2010 proposals included requests for 41 APDIs, of which 15 (36.6%) are approved for funding.
LIF
No requests were received for LIFs within this round.
Outcomes by Administering Organisation
Table 4: Numbers of proposals, success rates, ARC approved funding and Partner Organisation contributions for Linkage Projects Round One 2010 proposals by Administering Organisation
Administering Organisation |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
ARC approved funding over project life (approved Proposals) |
Total Partner Organisation contributions (cash & in-kind) pledged over Project life (approved proposals) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Australian Catholic University | 5 | 2 | 40.0% | $592,000 | $828,191 |
| Bond University | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | - | - |
| Charles Darwin University | 6 | 1 | 16.7% | $308,000 | * |
| Charles Sturt University | 3 | 1 | 33.3% | $285,000 | * |
| Curtin University of Technology | 9 | 5 | 55.6% | $1,404,198 | $2,925,592 |
| Deakin University | 17 | 10 | 58.8% | $2,513,212 | $3,964,376 |
| Flinders University | 11 | 1 | 9.1% | $80,007 | * |
| Griffith University | 16 | 6 | 37.5% | $1,425,669 | $2,081,687 |
| James Cook University | 5 | 2 | 40.0% | $1,360,000 | $2,326,205 |
| La Trobe University | 5 | 2 | 40.0% | $668,558 | $2,028,534 |
| Macquarie University | 14 | 2 | 14.3% | $940,000 | $1,322,443 |
| Monash University | 23 | 17 | 73.9% | $4,884,284 | $8,094,164 |
| Murdoch University | 8 | 3 | 37.5% | $666,000 | $1,239,111 |
| Queensland University of Technology | 12 | 7 | 58.3% | $2,016,106 | $3,332,132 |
| RMIT University | 18 | 6 | 33.3% | $1,514,604 | $2,862,987 |
| Southern Cross University | 4 | 1 | 25.0% | $423,520 | * |
| Swinburne University of Technology | 8 | 2 | 25.0% | $569,000 | $900,272 |
| The Australian National University | 18 | 10 | 55.6% | $3,900,349 | $10,166,291 |
| The University of Adelaide | 21 | 8 | 38.1% | $2,018,757 | $4,289,718 |
| The University of Melbourne | 46 | 25 | 54.3% | $6,976,733 | $12,013,378 |
| The University of New England | 4 | 1 | 25.0% | $280,000 | * |
| The University of New South Wales | 51 | 28 | 54.9% | $11,363,300 | $19,220,240 |
| The University of Newcastle | 7 | 2 | 28.6% | $358,000 | $638,092 |
| The University of Queensland | 40 | 19 | 47.5% | $6,787,093 | $14,952,963 |
| The University of Sydney | 28 | 15 | 53.6% | $4,931,676 | $8,833,893 |
| The University of Western Australia | 18 | 8 | 44.4% | $3,369,007 | $6,626,183 |
| University of Ballarat | 1 | 1 | 100.0% | $150,000 | * |
| University of Canberra | 2 | 1 | 50.0% | $275,000 | * |
| University of South Australia | 21 | 7 | 33.3% | $2,084,978 | $2,576,792 |
| University of Tasmania | 5 | 3 | 60.0% | $881,014 | $1,458,599 |
| University of Technology, Sydney | 9 | 2 | 22.2% | $389,000 | $465,991 |
| University of the Sunshine Coast | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | - | - |
| University of Western Sydney | 10 | 2 | 20.0% | $905,000 | $1,052,450 |
| University of Wollongong | 15 | 7 | 46.7% | $1,955,352 | $2,961,222 |
| Victoria University | 7 | 4 | 57.1% | $552,474 | $863,400 |
| Total | 470 | 211 | 44.9% | $66,827,891 | $121,330,707* |
*For confidentiality reasons, total contributions by Partner Organisations are not shown in instances in which Administering Organisations are associated with one approved proposal only. The total does, however, include the total contributions by Partner Organisations on approved Projects associated with those Administering Organisations.
Partnerships
Linkage Projects represent partnerships between university researchers and other organisations, as well as partnerships between Partner Organisations within projects. On average, there are 2.1 Partner Organisations involved in each approved Project in this Linkage Projects round. A summary of the Field of Research and Socio-Economic Objective categories identified by applicants for these Partner Organisations is shown in Table 5 and 6.
Table 5: Partner Organisation data by Field of Research category for Linkage Projects Round One 2010
Field of Research category |
Number of proposals approved † |
Total funding from all sources* |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences | 6 | $10,319,681 |
| Biological Sciences | 15 | $22,037,306 |
| Built Environment and Design | 5 | $3,054,341 |
| Chemical Sciences | 9 | $11,385,762 |
| Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services | 8 | $5,918,951 |
| Earth Sciences | 4 | $6,645,627 |
| Economics | 3 | $2,026,386 |
| Education | 9 | $9,365,692 |
| Engineering | 45 | $52,405,041 |
| Environmental Sciences | 18 | $24,024,006 |
| History and Archaeology | 2 | $2,070,663 |
| Information and Computing Sciences | 12 | $12,718,331 |
| Language, Communication and Culture | 4 | $3,441,062 |
| Law and Legal Studies | 1 | $889,970 |
| Mathematical Sciences | 3 | $2,603,981 |
| Medical and Health Sciences | 26 | $27,920,218 |
| Philosophy and Religious Studies | 1 | $852,871 |
| Physical Sciences | 4 | $5,840,273 |
| Psychology and Cognitive Sciences | 8 | $7,022,552 |
| Studies in Creative Arts and Writing | 3 | $4,613,951 |
| Studies in Human Society | 19 | $16,819,678 |
| Technology | 6 | $10,437,505 |
| Total | 211 | $242,413,848 |
† Based on the first Field of Research code selected on each proposal
* All sources includes: Administering Organisation, eligible Partner Organisation/s, Collaborating
Organisation/s and ARC
Table 6: Proposal data by Socio-Economic Objectives category for Linkage Projects Round One 2010
Socio-Economic Outcome category |
Numbers of proposals approved † |
Total funding from all sources* |
|---|---|---|
| Animal Production and Animal Primary Products | 5 | $8,611,516 |
| Commercial Services and Tourism | 6 | $6,791,070 |
| Construction | 7 | $4,799,643 |
| Defence | 0 | $0 |
| Economic Framework | 5 | $3,976,570 |
| Education and Training | 12 | $11,699,411 |
| Energy Resources | 4 | $7,334,942 |
| Energy Supply | 13 | $20,390,547 |
| Environmental Management | 25 | $34,301,031 |
| Environmental Policy Frameworks and other aspects | 5 | $5,575,807 |
| Health | 46 | $44,098,473 |
| Information and Communication Services | 16 | $14,434,979 |
| Manufacturing | 16 | $18,909,312 |
| Mineral Resources (Excl. Energy) | 3 | $3,205,528 |
| Non-Oriented Research | 10 | $12,637,942 |
| Plant Production and Plant Primary Products | 7 | $14,192,334 |
| Social Development and Community Services | 26 | $23,772,240 |
| Transport | 5 | $7,682,503 |
| Total | 211 | $242,413,848 |
†Based on the first Socio-Economic Outcome code selected on each proposal
* All sources includes: Administering Organisation, eligible Partner Organisation/s, Collaborating
Organisation/s and ARC
Partner Organisations were identified by the applicants as either International or Australian-based; government, non-profit, private companies or overseas higher education organisations. The Partner Organisation contributions in these categories for Round One 2010 approved Projects are shown below in Table 7.
Table 7: Partner Organisation contributions by sector for approved Linkage Projects in Round One 2010
Type |
Cash | In-kind | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
$M |
% |
$M |
% |
$M |
% |
||
| Government | |||||||
| Commonwealth | 1.7 | 4.6 | 2 | 2.4 | 3.7 | 3.1 | |
| State, Territory & Local | 10.1 | 27.2 | 22 | 26.1 | 32.1 | 26.4 | |
| International | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | |
| Sub-total | 11.9 | 32.1 | 24.8 | 29.4 | 36.7 | 30.2 | |
| Non-profit | |||||||
| Australian | 2.4 | 6.5 | 8.9 | 10.6 | 11.3 | 9.3 | |
| International | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1 | |
| Sub-total | 2.7 | 7.3 | 9.8 | 11.6 | 12.5 | 10.3 | |
| Private companies | |||||||
| Australian | 13.8 | 37.2 | 30.5 | 36.9 | 44.3 | 36.5 | |
| International | 8.5 | 22.9 | 16.6 | 19.7 | 25.1 | 20.7 | |
| Sub-total | 22.3 | 60.1 | 47.1 | 55.9 | 69.4 | 57.2 | |
| Education | |||||||
| International | 0.2 | 0.5 | 2.6 | 3.1 | 2.8 | 2.3 | |
| Sub-total | 0.2 | 0.5 | 2.6 | 3.1 | 2.8 | 2.3 | |
| Total | 37.1 | 84.3 | 121.4 | ||||
Note: All totals and percentages are calculated using rounded figures.
In approved Projects, private companies have pledged 60.1 per cent of the total cash and 55.9 per cent of the total in-kind contribution commitments by Partner Organisations. Government agencies have pledged 32.1 per cent of the total cash and 29.4 per cent of the in-kind contribution commitments by Partner Organisations. State, Territory and Local governments account for the bulk of government agency-pledged contributions (26.4% of overall pledged contributions, compared with 3.1% pledged by Commonwealth agencies).
Leverage of ARC Funding
The ARC considered 470 proposals seeking a total of $178.5 million in ARC funding over five years. These proposals were linked to 948 instances of Partner Organisation involvement, with total (cash and in-kind) pledged Partner Organisation contributions of $230 million over five years.
For the 211 approved Projects, the ARC will contribute $66.8 million and Partner Organisations have pledged a total (cash and in-kind) of $121.1 million over the life of these Projects. This represents $1.80 from Partner Organisations for every dollar funded by the ARC.
The total ARC allocation has increased from $55.2 million in Round One 2003 to $66.8 million in Round One 2010. There has been a greater proportional increase in the Partner Organisation total (cash and in-kind) contribution from $85.3 million in Round 1 2003 to $121.1 million in Round 1 2010. This greater proportional increase in Partner Organisation contributions has resulted in an increase in leverage of Partner Organisation contributions to ARC allocations from 1.5 in Round One 2003 to 1.8 in Round One 2010.
Table 8: Comparison of leverage of ARC funds for approved Linkage Projects from Round One 2003 to Round One 2010
Funding round and year |
Total ARC allocation |
Total Partner Organisation contribution (cash & in-kind) |
Leverage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rd 1 2010 | $66,827,891 | $121,330,707 | 1.8 |
| Rd 2 2009 | $71,856,782 | $127,979,159 | 1.8 |
| Rd 1 2009 | $71,704,687 | $128,877,735 | 1.8 |
| Rd 2 2008 | $63,717,139 | $115,136,011 | 1.8 |
| Rd 1 2008 | $62,267,846 | $95,032,189 | 1.5 |
| Rd 2 2007 | $60,313,034 | $114,246,463 | 1.9 |
| Rd 1 2007 | $59,434,943 | $105,481,215 | 1.8 |
| Rd 2 2006 | $53,980,315 | $91,005,817 | 1.7 |
| Rd 1 2006 | $56,564,715 | $84,240,904 | 1.5 |
| Rd 2 2005 | $58,101,851 | $101,980,929 | 1.8 |
| Rd 1 2005 | $53,276,211 | $80,364,264 | 1.5 |
| Rd 2 2004 | $66,467,567 | $95,661,309 | 1.4 |
| Rd 1 2004 | $48,683,379 | $68,361,263 | 1.4 |
| Rd 2 2003 | $45,912,227 | $73,303,393 | 1.6 |
| Rd 1 2003 | $55,182,916 | $85,344,360 | 1.5 |
International Collaboration
Linkage Projects Round One 2010 applicants foreshadowed 233 instances of international collaboration with researchers in 43 countries on 168 proposals. Of the 211 Projects approved for funding, applicants foreshadowed 123 instances of international collaboration in 24 countries on 88 proposals.
Instances of international collaboration on approved Projects has decreased slightly from 127 in Round two 2008 to 123 in Round One 2010. The highest incidence of international collaboration over the last four rounds has been with researchers in the United States of America. The second highest incidence of international collaboration over the last four rounds has been with researchers in the United Kingdom. Data relating to international collaboration over the last four rounds are shown in Table 9.
Table 9: Comparison of Linkage Projects proposals that involve international collaboration from Round two 2008 to Round One 2010
Collaborating Country |
2008 Round 2 | 2009 Round 1 | 2009 Round 2 | 2010 Round 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
|
| United States of America | 53 | 31 | 78 | 45 | 59 | 24 | 56 | 36 |
| United Kingdom | 27 | 9 | 38 | 19 | 41 | 22 | 29 | 21 |
| China, People's Republic | 15 | 5 | 13 | 8 | 21 | 10 | 19 | 13 |
| Canada | 17 | 8 | 18 | 10 | 20 | 10 | 18 | 9 |
| Germany | 14 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 12 | 8 | 16 | 7 |
| New Zealand | 8 | 5 | 17 | 10 | 16 | 10 | 12 | 7 |
| Switzerland | 7 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 5 |
| South Africa | 5 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Korea, Republic of | 4 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| Italy | 2 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
| Denmark | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Sweden | 11 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Hong Kong | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Netherlands, The | 6 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 1 |
| Indonesia | 1 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 1 |
| France | 9 | 6 | 12 | 9 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 1 |
| Japan | 7 | 2 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 |
| Ireland, Republic of | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Israel | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Spain | 4 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Russian Federation, The | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Philippines, The | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Singapore | 7 | 3 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| Papua New Guinea | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Malaysia | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Chile | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Vietnam | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Belgium | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Fiji | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Finland | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Mexico | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Norway | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Estonia | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Hungary | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Vanuatu | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| India | 6 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Argentina | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Brazil | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Thailand | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Bulgaria | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Malawi | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mozambique | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Austria | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Colombia | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| East Timor | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lithuania | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Poland | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Portugal | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Sri Lanka | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Taiwan | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tonga | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other* | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
| Total | 264 | 127 | 291 | 174 | 263 | 134 | 233 | 123 |
*Other = Algeria, Andorra, Anguilla, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bermuda, Bonaire, Bosnia, Botswana, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Croatia, Egypt, Ecuador, The Faroe Islands, Greece, Iran, Jersey, Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Mauritius, Mongolia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Qatar, Saipan, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Syria, Tahiti, Tanzania, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S. Virgin Islands
Age and Gender
The total number of participants (Chief Investigators, APDI’s and Partner Investigators) named on all proposals considered in this round is 1879. Of these, 593 are female and 1284 are male. The overall success rate for female and male participants in Round One 2010 Linkage Projects proposals is 47.4 per cent and 48.0 per cent respectively. Despite the number of female participants involved in Linkage Projects proposals being considerably lower than male participants, the success rates for female and male participants has remained very similar over the last eleven rounds. Gender success rates over the last ten Linkage Projects rounds are represented in Figure 1. Success rates by age and gender in the current Linkage Projects round are represented in Figure 2.
Figure 1. Comparison of Linkage Projects success rates between female and male participants from Round One 2005 to Round One 2010
Figure 2: Comparative success rates by participant age and gender for Linkage Projects proposals Round One 2010
National Research Priorities
The Australian Government has identified four National Research Priorities and, within these, 21 national research priority goals.
Of the 470 proposals considered in this round, 458 (97.4%) were identified by the applicants as addressing a National Research Priority. Of those 470, 205 (44.8%) are approved for funding, representing 97.2 per cent of the total 211 Projects approved for funding and accounting for 97.1 per cent of the total funding over the life of these Projects.
Table 10: Approved funding for Linkage Projects Round One 2010 by National Research Priority
Priority area |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Approved funds over project life |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| An Environmentally Sustainable Australia | 141 | 63 | 44.7% | $21,319,733 |
| Promoting and Maintaining Good Health | 127 | 50 | 39.4% | $18,249,672 |
| Frontier Technologies for Building and Transforming Australian Industries | 151 | 75 | 49.7% | $20,634,072 |
| Safeguarding Australia | 39 | 17 | 43.6% | $4,719,414 |
| None selected | 12 | 6 | 50.0% | $1,905,000 |
| Total proposals | 470 | 211 | 44.9% | $66,827,891 |
| Total priority proposals | 458 | 205 | 44.8% | $64,922,891 |
| % within priority areas | 97.4% | 97.2% | 97.1% |
Rural and Regional
The Linkage Projects scheme identifies proposals that are of benefit to rural and regional areas.
Of the 470 proposals considered in the current round, 153 were identified by the applicants as ‘rural and regional’. The requested funding for these proposals is $58.4 million which represents 32.7 per cent of the total funds requested by all considered proposals.
Of the 211 approved Projects, 73 were identified by the applicants as ‘rural and regional’. The approved total funding over the life of these Projects is $24.2 million which represents 36.3% of all approved Projects.
Table 11: Requested funding and approved allocations for Rural and Regional proposals by discipline panel for Round One 2010 Linkage Projects proposals
Panel |
Funds requested | Approved funds allocated | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
All proposals considered |
Rural and Regional proposals considered |
Percentage requested by Rural and Regional proposals |
Proposals approved |
Rural and Regional proposals approved |
Percentage allocated to Rural and Regional proposals |
|
| BSB | $49,095,379 | $18,063,804 | 45.4% | $18,561,793 | $9,555,381 | 51.5% |
| EE | $38,857,936 | $9,900,916 | 25.5% | $12,192,807 | $3,034,588 | 24.9% |
| HCA | $11,062,686 | $4,721,679 | 26.4% | $4,233,951 | $1,178,435 | 27.8% |
| MIC | $24,442,370 | $3,262,141 | 17.0% | $9,177,983 | $2,070,994 | 22.6% |
| PCE | $11,198,296 | $1,891,358 | 20.9% | $4,455,562 | $1,708,004 | 38.3% |
| SBE | $43,843,854 | $20,567,066 | 38.2% | $18,205,795 | $6,684,999 | 36.7% |
| Total | $178,500,521 | $58,406,964 | 32.7% | $66,827,891 | $24,232,401 | 36.3% |
Summary of Outcomes
Table 12: Comparison of proposal numbers, success rates, requested and allocated funds for successful proposals from Round One 2003 to Round One 2010
Funding round and year |
Proposals considered |
Proposals approved |
Success rate |
Requested funds over project life (all proposals) |
Requested funds over project life (approved proposal) |
Funds allocated over project life |
Allocation as a percentage of request |
| Rd 1 2010 | 470 | 211 | 44.9% | $178,500,521 | $94,619,567 | $66,827,891 | 70.6% |
| Rd 2 2009 | 522 | 239 | 45.8% | $201,624,648 | $105,186,071 | $71,856,782 | 68.3% |
| Rd 1 2009 | 441 | 218 | 49.4% | $178,815,658 | $106,032,303 | $71,704,687 | 67.6% |
| Rd 2 2008 | 487 | 208 | 42.7% | $182,915,040 | $93,414,877 | $63,717,139 | 68.2% |
| Rd 1 2008 | 424 | 202 | 47.6% | $140,343,990 | $78,546,893 | $62,267,846 | 79.3% |
| Rd 2 2007 | 472 | 217 | 46.0% | $159,099,346 | $90,541,315 | $60,313,034 | 66.6% |
| Rd 1 2007 | 485 | 208 | 42.9% | $174,086,843 | $84,147,797 | $59,434,943 | 70.6% |
| Rd 2 2006 | 577 | 206 | 35.7% | $158,958,973 | $70,707,892 | $53,980,315 | 76.3% |
| Rd 1 2006 | 529 | 194 | 36.7% | $149,127,122 | $70,255,021 | $56,564,715 | 80.5% |
| Rd 2 2005 | 585 | 251 | 42.9% | $146,659,128 | $74,669,866 | $58,101,851 | 77.8% |
| Rd 1 2005 | 463 | 237 | 51.2% | $109,106,675 | $66,169,679 | $53,276,211 | 80.5% |
| Rd 2 2004 | 426 | 240 | 56.3% | $128,057,836 | $76,806,838 | $66,467,567 | 86.5% |
| Rd 1 2004 | 322 | 164 | 50.9% | $97,271,443 | $56,647,236 | $48,683,379 | 85.9% |
| Rd 2 2003 | 408 | 176 | 43.1% | $117,063,072 | $59,199,898 | $45,912,227 | 77.6% |
| Rd 1 2003 | 373 | 197 | 52.8% | $113,969,301 | $68,662,807 | $55,182,916 | 80.4% |
26/10/09
