Bias and the grant process

Re: Grant process not politicized, Letters, April 6

“The system has been good to me so the system must be right” is what I take away from Dr. Carla Peck’s letter defending the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada ( SSHRC) decision not to fund Dr. Jordan Peterson’s research.

I also have served on government- funded scientific granting committees of the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council and the Medical Research Council ( now the Canadian Institute f or Health Research). The system was very good to me as my research was funded for 38 years until I retired, but in my experience the system is not as completely free from political considerations and bias as Dr. Peck infers.

Dr. Peck glosses over the obvious, namely that whenever government funding is involved there is always a political component. For example, she points out that eight to 10 academics are chosen to adjudicate each grant submission but does not point out that they are distributed relatively evenly from academic institutions representing all the provinces.

This suggests that the political bureaucrats overseeing the granting agencies ensure that every province receives an appropriate share of the funding, so that in effect there are different standards of merit for each province. More i mportantly, these adjudicators are ultimately chosen by politically appointed government bureaucrats.

The academic adjudicators chosen are for the most part accomplished individuals who try to evaluate proposals fairly on the basis of merit, but like everyone else they come with their biases. They are chosen primarily for their expertise and reputation but also on the basis that they support the prevailing system and what the system deems to constitute merit. If it turns out they do not, their tenure on any committee is likely to be very short.

Another issue that Dr. Peck glosses over is that a very important factor in deciding “merit” is the applicant’s previous research accomplishments and reputation. It is very unusual for a highly accomplished researcher like Dr. Peterson to have his funding terminated in such a summary manner.

Dr. Peterson’s arguments regarding l egislation on gender identity have not been in accord with government policy. To state without any reservation whatsoever that the granting process of government agencies is completely free of political influence, especially the SSHRC, is misleading to say the least. Dr. Harvey Kaplan, Professor, retired, University of Ottawa