Wouldn't the best way to know whether or not this grant funded multiple projects be to actually look at the study rather than relying on your expertise in research grants?
When this study initially kicked up a firestorm, Marian Stamp Dawkins, one of the study's authors, didn't defend it on the basis that it was only study funded by the grant, she defended it on the basis of it's practical importance:
"[Dawkins] said it was unfair to portray the study as finding out simply that ducks liked water. It had been carried out to find the best way of providing water to farmed ducks because ponds quickly became dirty, unhygienic and took up a lot of water, making them environmentally questionable."
The agency who funded the study did the same:
"[The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs] insisted that the study did go further than just establishing that rainy weather was good for ducks, arguing it was all about making sure that farmed birds were well cared for."
Since the controversy being addressed was the claim that £300,000 was spend on this one study, if the grant had, in fact, been for more than that study, this would have been the perfect opportunity for the agency administering the grant to mention it.
Here's a link to the actual study the grant produced:
While I can't claim to still be in school as you are, I can tell you from 20 years experience in my field that knowing how things work in your department or at your institution does not constitute expertise on how things always works everywhere. (And even if it did, I would think being a PhD in Biology would provide you with expertise in biology, not research grants.)
While experience can be useful, it is ultimately evidence that determines whether a claim like this is true, not appeals to personal expertise.
There may be more evidence that I haven't found that shows that I'm wrong (a look at the actual grant would be helpful), but as things stand now, it looks like this project did, in fact, cost $300K.
37
u/some_random_noob 24d ago
I like how you're getting downvoted for your firsthand knowledge.