Investigation of the impact of co-location: economies of scope and scale in biomedical and health research

重要的是要从公共部门对医学研究的投资中获得最佳结果。要做到这一点，研究资助者需要了解他们应该将有限的可用资金投资到哪里，以最大化投资的结果。在决定将资金分配到哪里时，一个考虑因素是生物医学研究是否存在范围和规模经济。当在同一地点从事两种不同的活动比分别从事同样的两种活动，例如在同一地点教授医学和研究医学时，据说存在范围经济。当在一个地方生产的数量越大，做某事或生产某事的成本越低时，就存在规模经济，例如，每次核磁共振扫描的成本随着扫描仪使用时间比例的增加而下降。在公共资助医学研究的背景下，项目和研究人员的研究产出将不同，范围经济的概念可能是最相关的。如果存在范围经济或规模经济，那么当医学研究资金集中在少数几个地点时，将产生更大的影响。相反，如果存在范围或规模的不经济，那么如果将资金分散到众多研究单位，而不是集中在几个单位，那么资金将更有成效。如果没有伟大的经济或不经济，那么每项投资的研究产出不会受到资金分配单位数量的影响。生物医学研究的规模和范围经济可能来自两个主要来源。它可能源于物理基础设施，如昂贵的研究设备或其他支持服务，在一大群人共同工作的情况下，可以更具成本效益地提供这些服务。或者，这可能是研究人员之间互动的结果，使他们能够更好地合作，并听取同事的建议。然而，新技术正在使基础设施的共享和远程通信变得更容易，因此可能意味着这些影响的重要性正在下降。对于是否存在范围和规模经济，以及如果存在，原因是什么，目前的证据尚不确定。因此，本项目旨在解决三个主要问题：1.医学研究中是否存在范围和规模经济：是支持几个地方的研究更好，还是将支持分散到多个地方？2.范围和规模经济的来源是什么：使用昂贵的特定基础设施，还是受地点影响的互动？3.就促进的互动而言，托管带来的好处(或坏处)在哪里以及如果托管带来的好处(或坏处)在不同的研究人员之间有什么不同(职业早期和职业后期，基础和临床，不同的研究领域等)，研究阶段以及它们随着时间的推移发生了怎样的变化(如果有的话)？我们将分三个阶段进行：1.对已经在这一主题上所做的工作进行彻底、快速的证据审查；2.与多个地点的研究人员进行面谈，并详细研究研究人员最近迁入新研究中心的几个具体地点，以了解新环境对其研究的影响以及他们合作的方式；3.开发一个(或多个)范围经济计量模型，并调查是否有必要的数据对其进行检验。该项目将作出三项贡献。首先，它将把现有证据汇编成一种政策制定者可以理解和使用的形式，并将其传播给他们。其次，它将通过对特定地点的采访和详细分析，对任何范围和规模经济在生物医学研究中发挥作用的方式产生新的见解。第三，它将探索在英国生物医学研究背景下对这一问题的严重性进行计量检验的可行性。

It is important to achieve the best outcomes from public sector investments in medical research. To do this, research funders need to understand where they should invest the limited funds they have available to maximise the outcomes from that investment. One consideration when deciding where to allocate funding is whether there are economies of scope and scale in biomedical research. Economies of scope are said to exist when undertaking two different activities in the same place is better value for money than undertaking the same two activities separately, e.g. teaching medicine in the same place as researching it. Economies of scale exist when the cost to do or produce something falls the greater the quantity produced in one place, e.g. the cost per MRI scan falls as the proportion of time a scanner is in use increases. In the context of public funding of medical research, where the research outputs will differ between projects and researchers, the concept of economies of scope is perhaps most relevant. If there are economies of scope or scale, then medical research funding would have greater impact when concentrated in a few locations. Conversely, if there are diseconomies of scope or scale then funding would be more productive if spread across numerous research units rather than being concentrated in a few. If there are no great economies or diseconomies, then research outputs per investment would be unaffected by the number of units that funding is spread across. Economies of scale and scope in biomedical research could come from two main sources. It could result from the physical infrastructure, such as expensive research equipment, or other support services, which can be provided more cost effectively where a large group of people are working together. Or it could result from the interactions between researchers, enabling them to work together better and draw on advice from colleagues. However, new technologies are making both the sharing of infrastructure, and long distance communication, easier so may mean that these effects are decreasing in importance. Current evidence is inconclusive on whether there are economies of scope and scale and if so, what causes them. Therefore, this project aims to address three main questions:1.Do economies of scope and scale exist in medical research: is it better to support research in a few places rather than spread support across many places?2.What is the source of any economies of scope and scale: use of costly and specific infrastructure, or interactions affected by location?3.Where and if benefits (or dis-benefits) exist as a result of colocation in terms of the interactions facilitated, how do these differ between different researchers (early career and later career, basic and clinical, different research areas etc.), research stages and how have they changed over time (if at all)?We will do this in three stages:1. A thorough, rapid evidence review of the work that has already been done on this subject;2. Interviews with researchers across a range of locations, and detailed study of a few specific locations where researchers have recently moved into new research centres to understand the effect of their new environment on their research and the way they work together;3. Development of an econometric model (or models) for economies of scope and scale, and investigation of whether the necessary data is available to test them.The project would make three contributions. First it will compile the existing evidence into a form that can be understood and used by policy makers, and disseminate that to them. Second it will develop new insights into the ways in which any economies of scope and scale function within biomedical research through the interviews and detailed analysis of specific locations. Third it would explore the feasibility of carrying out an econometric examination of the magnitude of the issue in the UK biomedical research context.