Grant counts, funding amount, and academic productivity: causal evidence from the NSFC
利用中国某顶尖理工科大学2005-2019年面板数据，通过工具变量法发现竞争性科研资助显著提升论文数量和质量，其中资助数量对青年学者持续产出作用更强，资助金额则支撑复杂高影响力研究。
This study explores the causal relationship between research funding and academic productivity, focusing on the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC). Grounded in Resource Dependence Theory and Cumulative Advantage Theory, the research distinguishes between two key funding mechanisms: grant count (indirect) and funding amount (direct). Using longitudinal data from a leading Chinese polytechnic university covering the period 2005–2019, and applying an instrumental-variable approach, we find that competitive research funding has a significant positive effect on both the quantity and quality of scientific publications. Specifically, grant count supports sustained productivity by enabling project continuity, facilitating collaboration, and accumulating experience, particularly among early-career scholars. In contrast, funding amount provides the essential resources needed to execute more complex, high-impact research projects. Grant count emerges as the stronger driver of cumulative academic output, especially for young faculty, by maintaining stable research pipelines and fostering long-term growth. These findings underscore the critical role of funding systems that balance continuous smaller grants with larger-scale investments, ensuring academic productivity, research capacity, and career progression across different academic stages.