The UN-approved scheme moving sustainability engagement forward
Future Earth—a network of scientists set up by the United Nations to advance research in sustainability—has launched the second round of its pathways communication grants, which are new this year. The grants offer small sums with the goal of ensuring that sustainability research reaches audiences beyond the scientific community.
Although they are paid for by a collection of French funders, the grants are open to anyone, regardless of their geographical location. The call is open until 30 September and there is up to €30,000 available in this round. Each project may receive between €2,500 and €10,000.
Natalie Chong, a science officer at Future Earth, gives potential applicants the lowdown.
What can make a bid stand out from the pack?
Creativity and diversity. These types of grant are really few and far between, so it is an opportunity for scientists to really think outside the box and flex their creative muscles. Normally, science is communicated in the same ways, in the form of academic publications or posters. This is a chance to move beyond that and have a bit of fun with it.
That might be daunting to those with little communications experience.
Yes, we know that science communication is not really part of many scientists’ training. That is why we encourage them to team up with communication professionals. Diversity is another factor that is important to us because we want to encourage interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration.
We also want diversity in terms of geography, gender and career stage. We really want to encourage a good mix of people.
Do researchers with a public engagement track record get prioritised?
No, not at all. We really want to encourage anyone and everyone to apply. We do have two different priority groups, however. We have dedicated a third of the funding to projects that are led by researchers working in low- to middle-income countries.
The other priority group is projects led by early career researchers. That is, PhD students or researchers who have received their PhD within the past six years.
What was the success rate in the first call?
In the first call, there were three successful projects out of around 36 proposals. That is mostly because the three projects had quite big budgets and we wanted to save some funding for the second round. For this round, we have about half of that funding left and the number of projects awarded will depend on proposed budgets. I expect this round will be similar, with maybe three or four projects selected.
How do you assess bids?
The scientific committee of the pathways initiative assesses the applications. That is made up of different researchers from varying disciplines. Also, there will be members on the committee who are communication professionals. Applications will be assessed on how well the proposal fits the scope of the call, the clarity of the proposal, the quality and the originality.
What is the weighting given to the project versus the people involved?
They are equally important. The scientific quality is a big factor, but we also encourage an interdisciplinary team, which means social scientists as well as natural scientists.
What mistakes did applicants make in the last round that should be avoided?
Not reading the call text thoroughly, particularly the part about the eligibility criteria. There were a lot of proposals that did not meet the basic eligibility requirements. That is vital, as otherwise we cannot assess the proposals properly.
If applicants have questions, we encourage them to contact us ahead of submission.
Beyond eligibility, what issues were there?
Some researchers had strong ideas but their timelines were not realistic or did not match up with their objectives. Communication professionals have the necessary skills to help them sharpen the narrative and increase the impact of their research to these non-academic communities through a cohesive strategy. By collaborating with such people, researchers are more likely to produce a realistic timeline.
In a project team, what should the split between researchers and communicators be?
A team should mostly be researchers, and then having one or two communication professionals would be great.
Do you offer coaching in communications?
There is no specific coaching but I am here to answer any questions for them, so they can just contact me directly via email.
Are you aiming to have a good geographical spread?
That would be ideal but, in the end, it comes down to the quality of the proposals. Of course, having a geographical spread will be a consideration.
Last time, the awards went to a project in Uruguay, another in Australia, and one was an international collaboration from researchers all over.
This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact sales@researchresearch.com