Success Factors For Grassroots-funded Research
- It's not about the money, but the people, says researcher Lisa Westcott Wilkins who leads Digventures, a crowdfunding platform for archaeological projects.
She once worked in the financial world in the United States before changing tracks. When Lisa Westcott Wilkins started Digiventures in 2012 to fund an excavation, she focused from the beginning on creating public engagement.
- It makes us better at communicating and thinking about in which way the research is relevant.
Reward with experience
When collecting, newsletters and social media are important pieces, but also the format of them. When donating money through a crowdfunding platform, it is common to be able to choose between different grant levels. The reward increases for each level, for example, you can donate so much that you get a t-shirt, and if you donate more you can get a map.
Her advice to anyone who is going to do a crowdfunding campaign for research projects in the field of culture is to include at least one reward level that is about experiencing something. For Digventures, it's about being part of digging. She is not worried about letting the public in on the excavations.
- It is a very European attitude that only academics should be allowed to participate. Everyone who participates is very respectful, receives technical training, and trained archaeologists are always present.
She emphasizes that crowdfunding cannot replace traditional research funds, but can create attention that helps researchers receive grants.
The good thing
Digventures is in many ways similar to crowdfunding projects for products. However, many research projects do not offer a significant reward for those who donate money.
Instead, it is about the good thing. Feedback from the researcher becomes all the more important here, something that Magnus Essand, professor of gene therapy at Uppsala University, is aware of.
- Everyone who has donated receives a newsletter by email from time to time. We record a video and tell what has happened since the last time.
Crowdfunding, and a large private donation, led to Magnus Essand's virus-based drugs now being tested on patients with neuroendocrine cancer. His research group has shown that virus therapy works on tumors in experimental animals, but without donations, there would have been no money to conduct a clinical study on humans.
It started with a dedicated British journalist, Alexander Masters, finding Essand's research while looking for new drugs for a friend with neuroendocrine cancer. Alexander Masters wrote articles about the money that was missing and started 2012 fundraising on the platform Indiegogo. In the beginning, it was necessary for it to be outside the university, even though Uppsala University has a unit for donation relations.
- Universities need to make a public procurement to use a crowdfunding platform, a process that takes up to six months, says Magnus Essand. But then the news has time to blow over. We clearly saw that money came in when it was written about in the media.
The unit for donation relations at the university ensured that the funds ended up on the right research project.
Entrepreneur stepped In
The fundraiser led to entrepreneur Vince Hamilton, also ill with neuroendocrine cancer, stepping in and committing to adding the money that was missing to do a clinical study on the drug. A total of around four million was raised from small and medium-sized grants, while Vince Hamilton donated around SEK 10 million.
- There were no formal counterclaims from him that he should be allowed to test the new virus drug. But it was understood that if he lived when it was time to start the study and met the criteria, he would have been allowed to participate as a subject.
Unfortunately, Vince Hamilton, like Alexander Master's friend, had time to die before it was time to let the first three cancer patients try the new treatment, just over three years after the collection started. The virus has been named AdVince in honor of Vince Hamilton's efforts.
- It took time from the time the money was collected until the clinical study could start. We needed to find a manufacturer who could produce viruses of clinical purity, write clinical protocols and produce documentation for regulatory approval.
There can also be an ethical conflict when a person donates large sums of money in order to be treated himself - that it is perceived as unfair, if one can, so to speak, "buy oneself a treatment", says Magnus Essand. He also points out that the collection concerns a clinical study that benefits 30 patients.
- The absolute majority of those who donated did so for a good cause.
Donors in the UK and US also have the option of making tax deductions for donations to charity.
University helps
Magnus Essand is hesitant about whether researchers themselves have time to run crowdfunding campaigns on a larger scale. It requires great dissemination in traditional or social media. He himself was not a driving force in his project and emphasizes that Uppsala University's unit for donation relations was very helpful and managed their common side for the campaign.
Uppsala University still receives donations to Magnus Essand's project through the oncolytic virus fund and helps with communication. The Indiegogo fundraiser was shut down in 2013 when the fundraising goal was reached, platforms also take a certain percentage of what was raised.
Lund University also has some support for researchers who want to do crowdfunding campaigns. Eric Hamilton works at the university's unit for donor relations, where both large and small donations are handled. For large donations, foundations are usually formed.
Crowdfunding is good for smaller things like travel. We help researchers find a structure for the work that they can then work on with themselves.
One example is researcher Pauls Franks, who raised money for a researcher exchange program for young diabetes researchers, in connection with a triathlon competition.
Controlled results
Traditional research funds are reviewed by scientific advice before they are granted. A potential problem with crowdfunding is that projects with a weak scientific basis could attract many donors.
- That a project that sells well, but is not on such a good scientific basis, can get many donors, says Magnus Essand.
In his case, there were preclinical results that Alexander Masters checked with leading virologists to be convinced that this was serious research.
- The university also acted as a guarantor. And according to Alexander Masters, there is also a strong scrutiny pressure from all those who donated money, says Manus Essand.
He also points out that donors in crowdfunding know which research project they are supporting, unlike fundraising foundations.
Natalie Jonk on the crowdfunding platform Crowdscience also does not think the risk is imminent.
- You are a very large audience, no researcher wants to publish something embarrassing.
Gained momentum in 2012
The first platform for crowdfunding came in 2010.
- It gained momentum around 2012. The decisive factor was probably that PayPal then made it easier to pay online. Outside Sweden, people are not as willing to pay with their cards online, says Claire Ingram, a doctoral student at the School of Business, Economics and Law, who researches phenomena in what is called sharing economy, including crowdfunding.
Factors such as the financial crisis may also increase the need for alternative forms of financing. Various platforms such as Indiegogo and Kickstarter were established and soon research niche platforms such as Experiment.com and CrowdScience also arrived.
- It is better for research projects to be on niche platforms, otherwise, they disappear in the noise of all other campaigns, says Claire Ingram.
Growing every year
Crowdfunding is growing every year. Globally, sales have grown from USD 2 billion in 2013 to USD 34 billion in 2015. At the same time, it is still significantly less than other forms of financing, states Claire Ingram.
She thinks it is more difficult for social science research to do fundraisers.
- With the exception of hot areas, such as economics and psychology, it is easier for science to show how the results can be used.
She also believes that you need to give something back as a grassroots-funded researcher.
- It can be a newsletter, or something symbolic, like his name on a star or being thanked in the scientific article.
Small campaigns work best
Natalie Jonk started Crowdscience in 2014. So far, small campaigns of around 3,000 British pounds seem to work best.
- It is still early in the development of crowdfunding.
She emphasizes that it is a lot of work for the researcher to market his project.
- Unlike the academy where you have to list your qualifications, you must instead show why your project is important and be able to network.
Networking can take place on social media, but also offline, for example with key people in different organizations. The organizations can in turn spread the campaign.
- We recently had a campaign where three company sponsors together donated 4,000 pounds.
The big advantage is the freedom compared to applying for a grant, she says.
- You have the chance to control yourself.
0 Comments