Advances in Earth Science

   

General Analysis of Project Review and Funding Results in Atmospheric Science in 2022

HE Jianjun, GE Fei, LIU Zhe, ZHANG Yu, GUO Yucong, LI Jing   

  1. Department of Earth Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Beijing 100085, China
  • About author:HE Jianjun (1983-), male, Rudong County, Jiangsu Province, Professor. Research areas include management of National Natural Science Foundation of China. E-mail: hejj@nsfc.gov.cn

HE Jianjun, GE Fei, LIU Zhe, ZHANG Yu, GUO Yucong, LI Jing. General Analysis of Project Review and Funding Results in Atmospheric Science in 2022[J]. Advances in Earth Science, DOI: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2022.098.

The Division V (Atmospheric Discipline) of the Department of Earth Sciences, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), successfully completed the application, review, funding and conclusion of General Program, Young Scientists Fund, and Fund for Less Developed Regions in 2022. In terms of program applications, the Division V of Department of Earth Sciences received 1817 applications for the above three types of programs in 2022, with an increase of 5.9% over 2021. Among them, 11 applications were not accepted because they did not conform to the management specifications. From the perspective of project review, the comprehensive score in 2022 is slightly higher than that in 2021. The review expert group supports original and cross research, as well as technology research and development. In terms of funding, the number of the above three types of programs funded in 2022 increased by 7.0% compared with 2021, and 11.9% for the Youth Science Foundation. From the conclusion results, 314 projects were concluded in 2021, and the indexes such as published papers were equivalent to those in previous years. In 2022, the atmospheric discipline is included in the “Responsibility, Credibility, Contribution (RCC)” evaluation mechanism reform pilot discipline. In 2022, 97.3% of review comments return on time. 81.8% of the experts believed that RCC mechanism could improve the fairness of the expert evaluation, and 90.9% of the experts believed that RCC mechanism could make the experts pay more attention to the contribution of the evaluation opinions to the applicants.
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract