Thematic
Research - Proposal Writing: What You Need to Know
What Happens Next?
When you have finished the proposal do not just to send
it to the AERC Secretariat in its first draft form.
You should first give it to your colleagues for comments.
You will be surprised by their reactions: What would
seem perfectly clear to you they may find confusing.
Where you thought you had covered the literature they
may point to some important papers you had never heard
of, and while you were convinced that you had dealt
with all econometric issues they may find a gaping hole
in your methodology.
Do not be discouraged by such comments as they will
definitely improve your proposal. It is a good idea
to give your proposal to some researchers who are experts
in the field and ask for their comments. You should
also give the draft proposal to some colleagues with
AERC experience who can tell you what is likely to be
acceptable or not. You should, therefore, revise your
proposal more than once before submitting it.
When a proposal arrives at the Secretariat there is
a brief internal review first. The Secretariat will
check whether the proposal contains the basic information
needed and whether it addresses an issue that fits the
AERC research programme. For example, a biological research
project on plant diseases will get caught in the Secretariat's
net at this stage because the AERC supports only economic
research. But the vast majority of proposals normally
clear this first hurdle.
The next step is to determine whether the proposal
can be presented at an AERC workshop. This decision
is perhaps the most important one in the AERC process.
Presentation of a new proposal at an AERC workshop exposes
the researcher to comments, advice and guidance from
fellow researchers and resource persons.
While this is sometimes terrifying, it is a tremendously
useful experience, and of course the essence of the
network's capacity building. Bringing people to a workshop
is expensive, however; hence slots must be rationed.
Also, inviting a person to a workshop does not always
make sense. If the proposal is very far from what is
required, the researcher might be hurt by the experience
while learning little from it. For this reason proposals
are reviewed to establish whether an invitation to the
next workshop is warranted.
Secretariat staff sometimes do the review, but more
commonly the reviewers are resource persons. The reviewer
reads the proposal, writes a short report (one page
or so) and advises the Secretariat what changes (if
any) need to be made before the proposal is suitable
for workshop presentation. The reviewer may also recommend
rejection. Note that the reviewers have no power of
decision, but they are advisers of the AERC Research
Director. You should think of them as referees rather
than journal editors.
A large number of proposals are held back at this stage.
This is almost entirely avoidable. Typically researchers
make one or more of the following common mistakes:
They have never looked at an AERC proposal so they
have no clue as to what to include and what not to include.
The proposal is clear on the research question, but
very vague on the methodology.
Similar work has already been done (sometimes even
work supported by the, AERC itself) and the author is
unaware of it or unable to explain the value added of
the proposed research.
The Secretariat may then ask you to withdraw the proposal
or to revise it before you are invited to a workshop.
In the case of revision the proposal may be sent out
once more for review, but this is rare.
|
