Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-16 (section)

==== 16.4.4.3 Emerging Insights on Different Public R&amp;D and Demonstration Funding Schemes ====

<div id="h3-18-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The ability of a given R&amp;D policy instrument to impact innovation and competitiveness depends to some extent on policy design features ( ''limited evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ). As discussed in [[#16.4.4.4|Section 16.4.4.4]] , this is not unique to R&amp;D funding. Most of these assessments use a limited number of indicators (e.g., patents and publications and follow-on private financing, firm growth and survival, respectively), and are focused on the energy sector, and on the USA and other industrialised countries. Extrapolating to emerging economies and low-income countries is difficult. There is no evidence on the impact of different ways of allocating public energy R&amp;D investments in the context of developing countries.

Block funding, which tends to be more flexible, can lead to research that is more productive or novel, but there are other factors that can affect the extent to which block funding can lead to more or less novel outcomes ( ''limited evidence'' , ''medium agreement'' ). Research on national research laboratories, which conduct at least 30% of all research in 68 countries around the world ( [[#Anadon--2016a|Anadon et al. 2016a]] ), are a widespread mechanism to carry out public R&amp;D and allocate funds, but assessments of their performance is limited to developed countries. R&amp;D priorities are also guided by institutions, and research focused on general technology innovation policy finds that institutions often do not embody the goals of the poor or marginalised ( [[#Anadon--2016b|Anadon et al. 2016b]] ).

In the case of the US Department of Energy, block funding that can be quickly allocated to novel projects (such as that allocated to National Labs as part of the Laboratory Directed Research and Development funding) has been found to be associated with improved innovation indicators ( [[#Anadon--2016a|Anadon et al. 2016a]] ). Research in Japan on R&amp;D funding in general (not for climate-related technologies) however, indicates that R&amp;D funds allocated competitively result in higher novelty for ‘high status’ (the term used in the paper to refer to senior male researchers), while block funding was associated with research of higher novelty for ‘lower status’ researchers (e.g., junior female researchers) ( [[#Wang--2018|Wang et al. 2018]] ).

<div id="Box 16.6 | ARPA-E – A Novel R&D Funding Allocation Mechanism Focused on an" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="box-16.6-arpa-e-a-novel-rd-funding-allocation-mechanism-focused-on-an-energy-mission"></span>