Interdisciplinary Data Report

Overview

One of the actions identified in the  ARC Statement of Support for Interdisciplinary Research is for the ARC to provide data on interdisciplinary applications.

This is the fourth data report (updated November 2019), enabled by the inclusion in applications of questions about whether the proposed research is interdisciplinary. The report includes the outcomes of all selection rounds for funding commencing in 2019, and Linkage Projects applied for in 2018.

The selection rounds included are:

Discovery Program

• Discovery Projects (DP)
• Discovery Indigenous (IN)
• Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE)
• Future Fellowships (FT)
• Australian Laureate Fellowships (FL)

Linkage Program

• Industrial Transformation Research Hubs (IH)
• Industrial Transformation Training Centres (IC)
• Linkage, Infrastructure, Equipment and Facilities (LE)
• Special Research Initiatives (SR)

The analysis of data arising from the interdisciplinary research (IDR) questions, is the first step by the ARC in seeking information to help it better understand the IDR profile of ARC-funded researchers. It informs future ARC policy and assists with the appropriate assessment of applications.

The report is indicative of the volume and range of interdisciplinary applications and outcomes. It should be noted that these are both subject to large variations between disciplines and in interdisciplinary intensity, so that drawing any direct conclusions about application versus success rate needs to be approached with caution.

Key figures

• Overall, 63.9 per cent of applications received and 62.0 per cent of projects funded identified as involving interdisciplinary research in 2019
• The success rate of interdisciplinary projects was 20.83 per cent
• 'Methodology' was the most frequently indicated interdisciplinary element of applications and funded projects (82.8 per cent and 83.2 per cent respectively)
• The primary 2-digit Field of Research with the highest proportion of interdisciplinary applications was 'Medical and Health Sciences' (94.9 per cent of applications)
• The primary 2-digit Field of Research with the lowest proportion of interdisciplinary applications was 'Physical Sciences' (31.6 per cent of applications)

Summary of outcomes

What proportion of total applications received by the ARC identified as involving IDR? 

Of the 5482 applications received for funding under all schemes, 3505 (or 63.9 per cent) identified as involving IDR. 

Table 1. Proportion of IDR applications received

Of the 1169 research projects funded under all schemes, 730 (or 62 per cent) identified as involving IDR.

Table 2. Proportion of IDR projects funded

What is the success rate of IDR applications compared to the overall success rates?

The success rate of applications that indicated they involved IDR ranged from 13.8 per cent under the Laureate Fellowships scheme to 36 per cent under the Discovery Indigenous scheme. 

Success rates for IDR applications are generally on par with overall success rates achieved for each scheme, with the largest differences recorded under the Industrial Transformation Research Hubs scheme (33.3 per cent versus 0 per cent of non-IDR applications).

Table 3. Success rates for IDR and non-IDR applications

How is the research interdisciplinary? By Design, Investigatory Team, Methodology or Other?

Of the applications across all schemes that identified as involving IDR, the largest proportion selected 'Methodology' as the means by which the research was IDR (82.8 per cent of applications and 83.2 per cent of funded projects). This was followed by 'Investigatory Team' (64.9 per cent of applications and to 64.1 per cent for funded projects), 'Design' (45.7 per cent of applications and 44.5 per cent for funded projects) and 'Other' (6.4 per cent of applications and 4.9 per cent for funded projects).
Note that researchers were able to select more than one category.

Table 4. Instances of IDR element for IDR applications for funding commencing in 2019*

*Note: This is a multiple response question so the total number of elements selected will be greater than the number of applications/funded projects. 

Figure 1. Instances of IDR element selected on research applications for funding commencing in 2019

• Red—Funded IDR projects
• Blue—IDR applications
• Methodology—Red 83%, Blue 83%
• Investigatory Team—Red 64%, Blue 65%
• Design—Red 45%, Blue 46%
• Other—Red 5%, Blue 6%

When comparing elements across all schemes for funded projects (Figure 2), 'Methodology' made up 83 per cent of all instances identified, followed by 'Investigatory Team' (64 per cent), 'Design' (45 per cent) and 'Other' (5 per cent).

Table 5. Instances of IDR element for applications received and funded*

*Note: This is a multiple response question so the total number of elements selected will be greater than the number of applications/funded projects.

Figure 2. Instances of IDR element on funded research projects commencing in 2019 (incl. all LP18)

• Methodology—Blue 42%
• Investigatory Team—Orange 33%
• Design—Green 23%
• Other—Yellow  2%

By Field of Research

In what 2-digit Fields of Research (FoR) are the largest proportion of IDR projects recorded as a proportion of total projects?

The 2-digit FoRs with the highest proportion of IDR applications (that is, IDR applications as a proportion of total applications) were Medical and Health Sciences (94.9 per cent), Studies in Creative Arts and Writing (86.7 per cent) and Agricultural and Veterinary Science (81.3 per cent).

Figure 3. Proportion of funded IDR projects commencing in 2018 by 2-digit FoR

• A graph of proportion of funded IDR projects by 2-digit FoR.
• Blue—IDR projects funded
• Red—Non-IDR projects funded

Table 6. Funded projects commencing in 2019 (incl. LP18) by 2-digit FoR