Catchup – Debate – Rethinking Research Funding: Peer Review vs Lottery

Is it time to rethink how we award research funding? Join Dr Byron Creese and Dr Subhashisa Swain for a live online debate on 19 November at 8pm GMT and cast your vote.

Debate Motion:

This House believes that grant funding should be distributed by lottery, not peer review.

With growing concerns about bias, inefficiency, and inequity in the peer review process, some have proposed random allocation, or partial lotteries, as a fairer way to fund science. But would replacing peer review with chance undermine merit and rigour? Or could it free researchers from wasted effort and create more diverse, innovative science? Join this live debate to explore whether the grant lottery is a radical gamble or a rational solution.

Speaker For the Motion:

Dr Byron Creese is a Senior Lecturer & Director of Research at Brunel University of London. His research focuses on the biological basis of neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia and related disorders. Byron has been involved in large-scale studies and leads several multidisciplinary collaborations. He is interested in how funding structures influence scientific creativity and equity.

Speaker Against the Motion:

Dr Subhashisa Swain is an NIHR ARC Dementia Postdoctoral Research Fellow, based jointly at the University of Oxford and Keele University. A physiotherapist and epidemiologist by training, his research focuses on dementia, ageing, multimorbidity, and musculoskeletal conditions. He uses large electronic health records and advanced statistical techniques to study complex health trajectories and improve care across the life course. With over a decade of research experience in both developing and developed countries, he is also involved in postgraduate teaching and international collaborations.

What to Expect

Join us for a live online debate where our speakers will present opposing views on the continued relevance of animal models in dementia research. The session will include:

• 10-minute opening statements from each speaker
• Moderated discussion
• Audience Q&A
• Live vote before and after the debate to see if opinions shift

This is your opportunity to explore whether the future of research funding lies in expert judgment, the luck of the draw, or perhaps a mix of the two.