PEET and NSF and jobs

Richard Zander zander at AG.NET
Wed Nov 27 10:47:28 CST 1996

Recently there was some mail traffic about the lack of posistions for
systematists, with a comment that indirect costs from large grants are
what fuel deans' decisions to hire gene-cloners and the like rather than
systematists, whose grant proposals are less burdened with impedimenta.
Does anyone know what proportion of grants have indirect costs based on
the total granted amount and what proportion have indirect costs based
on just salaries? If indirect costs were mainly based on salaries,
perhaps we can't be so righteous; on the other hand, I figure that PEET
is no incentive to train more systematists when jobs are scarce, some
incentive like doubling indirect costs on systematics grants (like
double coupons) would be far more productive of healthy systematics in
the next century.


Richard H. Zander, Buffalo Museum of Science
1020 Humboldt Pkwy, Buffalo, NY 14211 USA zander at

More information about the Taxacom mailing list