RENT-A-CROWD? CROWDFUNDING ACADEMIC RESEARCH

0c377cc88a
BY Rebecca English,  

Web 2.0 fundamentally shifts the nature of academic work. While there has been some research into the relationship between academics and students in Web 2.0 spaces, especially around Facebook (cf., English and Duncan–Howell, 2008; Madge, et al., 2009; English and Duncan–Howell, 2011) and teaching and assessment (cf., Greenhow, et al., 2009; Pierce, et al., 2011; Richardson, et al., 2012) there is limited research into the implications of new technologies on academic research work, especially in relation to funding. As noted by Pierce, et al. (2011), “the role of computing and the ability to both generate and analyse unprecedented amounts of data has significantly remoulded many arenas of scientific research.”

[1] In the interests of democratizing academic work and increasing participation, players in universities are using Web 2.0 in multiple sites.

This paper explores the use of crowdsourcing and crowdfunding models to fund academic research. McNally, et al. (2012) have argued that crowdsourcing and crowdfunding are being “hailed in the business world as ushering in new and empowering democratic models” however it “remains underutilized and understudied and, with respect to public policy, greatly misunderstood.” [2] The goal of this paper is to explore the successes as well as the pitfalls and challenges of attempting to use both crowdsourcing and crowdfunding in a small–scale pilot study of home education in Australia. There is some work that examines the pitfalls, challenges and successes of crowdfunding and crowdsourcing in the creative industries (cf., Klaebe and Laycock, 2012). The creative industries, such as music, film and arts, have traditionally used the crowdfunding platforms in Australia, and this use may explain why the research is specifically related to their experience of crowdfunding (cf., Klaebe and Laycock, 2012).

It is useful at this point to define crowdfunding and crowdsourcing. The term crowdfunding is used to denote ventures that are funded “by voluntary donations via an open call to anybody to donate.” [3] It is organized around a Web site such as Pozible (http://www.pozible.com/) or Kickstarter (www.kickstarter.com/). Some of the current projects on Pozible include a documentary exposing the cruelty of Australia’s intensive pig farming industry (cf.http://www.pozible.com/project/33686), a children’s book about a native Australian animal, the bandicoot (an animal closely related to the bilby) who steals a boy’s grandmother’s underwear (http://www.pozible.com/project/29992) and a community engagement project that moved a not–for–profit business supplying suits for women who were returning to work and helps the long–term unemployed get jobs within three months (http://www.pozible.com/project/11925). Some Kickstarter projects include a writing project about living in a van (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/fosterhuntington/home-is-where-you-park-it), a strategy game (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/5livesstudios/satellite-reign) and a pop EP from a young Australian artist (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1690032595/kelsey-guards-original-ep). These sites allow creative projects to be funded via an Internet platform that brings potential project designers together with potential funders (Pozible, 2010).

The projects seeking to be funded are run independent of the platform that hosts the call for funds (Kickstarter, 2013). A project is developed, a funding goal and deadline to meet that goal is set and then the project is opened so that interested parties can pledge money. “If the project succeeds in reaching its funding goal, all backers’ credit cards are charged when time expires. If the project falls short, no one is charged.” [4] Thus, crowdfunding is generally an all–or–nothing enterprise. By contrast, crowdsourcing generally refers to the participatory online activity of open calls for individuals to voluntarily undertake a task, the key features of a crowdsourcing project is the open call format and the large network of potential participants (Howe, 2005). This project faced some issues in relation to crowdsourcing because, as a model, the open call and large network of potential participants challenged the traditional ‘ethical clearance’ guidelines imposed by the university. One of the major implications of using crowdsourcing was the need to explain the model to the ethics advisor in the faculty, who struggled to understand the nature and the scope of the platform as well as how it functioned. In addition, there were problems with ensuring that all data was de–identified.

This paper deals with the funding realities faced by academics. As public monies dry up, academics are increasingly relying on funding sources provided by businesses or commercial enterprises (cf., Chang, et al., 2009; Lam, 2010; Radder, 2010; Szelényi and Goldberg, 2011) which changes the nature of academic work, scholarship and the knowledge generated by research. At the same time, academics are asked to do more with less time because of increases in teaching load expectations (cf., Vardi, 2009; Nkomo, 2009; Tight, 2010). Thus, academics need to find ways to creatively fund their research projects and maintain their output in a competitive environment. Particularly, the push to find creative funding sources is significant in an environment “democratised” by the proliferation of digital technologies and the drive to create by Gen C (cf., English and Duncan–Howell, 2008; Massanari, 2012).

This paper argues that a crowdsource and crowdfund model can successfully generate funding for academic research work, however, it is not without its pitfalls. While there is some research into the problems of using these tools in design (cf., Massanari, 2012), there is also research that demonstrates that public participation is significantly improved with the use of crowdsourcing and crowdfunding tools (cf., Brabham 2012, 2009). These tools allow for a greater pool of applicants and thus, as Massanari (2012) states, mean that the potential for challenging professional norms of practice, particularly in design. The results of the current project suggest that where academics are working in areas that are closely connected to their communities of interest, then crowdsourcing and crowdfunding allows for more of a participatory involvement with the research subjects that blurs the interviewer/interviewee divide.  Source on

http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4818/3804

++++++++++

 

Tags: , , , , ,

HEADLINE NEWS

U.S. News & World ReportNo Cash for Hate, Say Mainstream Crowdfunding FirmsU.S. News & World ReportThe block on mainstream crowdfunding is just the latest blow to far-right activists operating online. In the last 24 hours, neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer had its domain regi [...]

Global Crowdfunding Market 2017-2021PR Newswire (press release)Global Crowdfunding Market 2017-2021, has been prepared based on an in-depth market analysis with inputs from industry experts. The report covers the market landscape and its growth prospects over the coming years. The rep [...]

Crain's Cleveland Business'Smaller' gifts can go long way for Clinic's crowdfunding platformCrain's Cleveland BusinessFor an institution accustomed to securing multimillion-dollar donations, Cleveland Clinic's latest fundraising effort has some relatively [...]

NewshubWoman born without vagina crowdfunding surgeryNewshubThe family of a woman born without a vagina has started a crowdfunding campaign to receive reconstructive surgery. Kaylee Moats, from Arizona, lives with Mayer Rokitansky Küster Hauser syndrome (MRKH) meaning she has no cervi [...]

ForbesWhat Works In Equity Crowdfunding -- Insights From ResearchForbesAs we have recently celebrated the fourth anniversary of the signing of the JOBS Act into law, it is a good time to take stock of the effect that the legislature had on equity crowdfunding in the United States. It [...]

Technical.ly BaltimoreArbit took to crowdfunding to seek out investorsTechnical.ly BaltimoreThe Baltimore-based social polling company is seeking to raise a maximum of $425,000 through equity crowdfunding, a funding instrument that was first officially made available last year with re [...]

ForbesMoney Makes Small Businesses Go Round: Ensuring Access For AllForbesIn 2008, a new form of financing — rewards-based crowdfunding — premiered. With money raised on crowdfunding platforms like Indiegogo and Kickstarter, startups and companies with a new product idea connect direc [...]

Baltimore Business JournalCrowdfunding initiative for women-owned startups comes to MarylandBaltimore Business JournaliFundWomen, a crowdfunding platform dedicated to helping women-led businesses find support, is launching in Maryland in partnership with the incubator Betamore, PNC Ba [...]

CNETKickstarter alternatives: Choosing a crowdfunding platformCNETCrowdfunding, a compelling way to raise funds and generate buzz for a new entrepreneurial endeavor, is almost synonymous with Kickstarter. While Kickstarter is a major platform, several other crowdfunding sites are wort [...]

SiliconBeatPayPal, crowdfunding sites cut off white supremacists, hate groupsSiliconBeatPayPal and some crowdfunding sites have joined other tech companies in cutting off hate groups after the deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, over the weekend. The Southern [...]

CFB Finance

Marketwired

  • Crowdfunding
  • Crowdfund
  • Peer to Peer Lending
  • FinTech
  • Reg A+
  • Reg CF
  • Crowdfunding USA

Press Release

Live Crowdfunding .tv

What's Next Step in Regulation A+ JOBS ACTS Title IIII :L Interview : Steve Cinelli with Brian Korn Securities and Crowdfunding/Peer-to-Peer Lending Lawyer, Watch more video library | Conference | Interview | Campaign Showcase | Research | Education |