🎓 What if a university promised to fund your research for a full decade?
In Japan, most research grants last 3–5 years — and when the money runs out, even promising projects stall. Now, Kansai University is breaking the mold with a bold new program offering over $650,000 per project across 10 years. For a private university in Japan, this is almost unheard of.
Here's what's behind this move — and why it matters for the future of Japanese research.
A Private University Bets Big on Long-Term Research
Kansai University, one of Japan's well-established private universities based in Osaka, announced in January 2026 the creation of its "Flagship Research Program" (Furaggushippu Kenkyū Puroguramu). Starting in the 2026 academic year, the program will provide long-term, large-scale funding to top-tier research projects that could become the university's signature research centers.
What makes this program stand out is its sheer duration and scale. Each selected project can receive support for up to 10 years, totaling over 100 million yen (approximately $650,000). For a private university in Japan — where research budgets tend to be tighter than at national universities — this level of commitment is exceptional.
How the Three-Phase Funding Works
The program is designed around three distinct phases, each addressing a different stage in a research project's lifecycle:
Phase 1 — Preparation (Up to 2 years): The university provides up to 10 million yen (about $65,000) per year. This seed funding helps researchers develop their ideas, build preliminary data, and prepare competitive applications for major external grants.
Phase 2 — External Funding Period: Once a project secures external funding — such as grants from Japan's major competitive funding bodies like KAKENHI (Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research) — the research continues using those external resources. The university steps back during this phase, letting the external money do the heavy lifting.
Phase 3 — Development (Up to 3 years): This is the most innovative part. After external funding ends, the university steps back in with up to 30 million yen (about $195,000) per year. This "safety net" prevents promising research from losing momentum just because a grant period has expired.
The target level of external funding is substantial — researchers are expected to secure competitive grants worth at least 20 million yen (about $130,000) per year in direct costs, running for three or more years. For reference in the KAKENHI system, this corresponds roughly to a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (S) level or above, which is among the most prestigious and competitive categories.
Why This Matters: Japan's Research Funding Crisis
To understand why Kansai University's move is significant, you need to know about a structural problem that has plagued Japanese academia for years.
Japan's research output has been declining relative to other countries. In the early 2000s, Japan ranked second globally in total scientific publications. By the late 2010s, it had fallen to fourth — overtaken by China and India. More concerning, Japan's share of highly cited papers (the top 10% most referenced in the world) has dropped even further.
Several factors drive this decline. Since 2004, when national universities were incorporated as independent legal entities, the government has gradually reduced their base operational funding (un'ei-hi kōfukin). These base funds cover everything from salaries to building maintenance, and what's left over trickles down to researchers. As this baseline has shrunk, universities have become increasingly dependent on competitive grants — money that researchers must apply for, compete against peers to win, and spend within strict time limits.
The result is a frustrating cycle. Researchers spend more time writing grant applications and less time doing actual research. A government survey found that Japanese university professors' research time dropped from about 46.5% of their working hours in 2002 to just 35% by 2013. About 80% of researchers say they don't have enough time for research, citing meetings, administrative duties, and — ironically — the paperwork required to apply for more grants.
Even when researchers do win competitive funding, the grants typically run for 3–5 years. Many important scientific questions simply can't be answered in that timeframe. When the grant ends, if the next application isn't immediately approved, the research team may lose its momentum, equipment access, or even its junior members who move on to more stable positions.
The "Valley of Death" Between Grants
Kansai University President Tomoyuki Takahashi highlighted this exact problem in announcing the new program. He noted that even researchers who successfully secure external funding often face a "stall" when that funding period ends. The gap between one grant ending and the next beginning — sometimes called the "valley of death" in research funding — can derail years of accumulated progress.
The Flagship Research Program's three-phase design directly addresses this. By providing university funds both before and after the external funding period, it creates a continuous runway that gives researchers the stability to think in decades, not just fiscal years.
This approach also aims to attract collaboration beyond Kansai University's own faculty. The program envisions building international, interdisciplinary "co-creation networks" (kyōsō nettowāku) — bringing together researchers from multiple institutions to form major research hubs that could put the university on the global academic map.
Private Universities Fighting for Relevance
There's another dimension to this story. Japan's private universities are facing a demographic crisis. With the country's birthrate at historic lows, the number of 18-year-olds entering college is shrinking every year. Many smaller private universities are already struggling to fill their enrollment quotas, and some face the prospect of closure.
In this environment, private universities need to differentiate themselves. While many focus on improving undergraduate education or campus facilities, Kansai University is making a strategic bet on research excellence. By nurturing flagship research projects, the university hopes to raise its academic reputation, attract top faculty, and ultimately draw more students and funding in a virtuous cycle.
This mirrors a broader trend in Japanese higher education. The government has been pushing universities — both public and private — to identify their strengths and invest in them strategically, rather than trying to be all things to all people. Programs like the Top Global University Project and the newly established University Endowment Fund (a massive 10 trillion yen fund to support research universities) reflect this push toward concentration and excellence.
What This Means for the Bigger Picture
Kansai University's Flagship Research Program is just one institution's response to a systemic challenge, but it represents an important shift in thinking. Instead of simply competing for a larger slice of a shrinking pie, the university is creating its own support infrastructure that complements — rather than replaces — the national competitive funding system.
If successful, this model could inspire other private universities to develop similar long-term support mechanisms. It also sends a signal that research excellence isn't the exclusive domain of Japan's elite national universities like the University of Tokyo or Kyoto University.
For researchers at Kansai University, the program offers something rare in Japanese academia: the freedom to pursue ambitious, long-term research questions without the constant anxiety of funding gaps. Whether it leads to breakthrough discoveries remains to be seen, but the structural conditions for deep, sustained research are being put in place.
Japan has produced 29 Nobel laureates in the natural sciences — a remarkable achievement. But as the country's research infrastructure ages and competition intensifies globally, new approaches to funding and supporting research are urgently needed. Kansai University's bold experiment may be exactly the kind of innovation that Japanese higher education needs right now.
In your country, how does university research get funded? Do researchers face similar "valley of death" problems between grants, or are there better safety nets in place? We'd love to hear how different countries tackle the challenge of supporting long-term scientific research.
References
Reactions in Japan
Impressive move by Kansai University. Committing $650K over 10 years is a huge deal for a private school. The funding gap is the hardest part for researchers, so this structure must be a relief.
But only a handful of top projects will be selected, right? The vast majority of researchers are still scrambling for funding year to year.
It's kind of sad that a private university has to do what the government should be doing. This is the result of years of cutting operating grants to national universities.
The year our lab's KAKENHI ran out, we literally couldn't do anything. Couldn't even buy supplies. I wish every university had something like this.
It takes guts for a private university facing declining enrollment to invest in research. But I wonder if it's financially sustainable.
I'm a Kansai U student. I'd be happy if our university's reputation improves, but honestly worried this might affect tuition 😅
The idea of the university covering the gaps before and after external grants makes total sense. It fills the valley of death. The question is whether the selection process will be transparent enough.
Targeting projects at the KAKENHI S level and above means an extremely high bar. The real question is how many researchers at Kansai U can even compete at that tier.
I notice this doesn't address the fixed-term contract problem for postdocs. Even with 10-year project funding, junior researchers on 3-year contracts still have no stability.
For science faculty, even $195K per year might not be nearly enough. A single piece of equipment can cost over a million dollars.
Elite universities aren't the only ones that can do real research. I fully support mid-tier private universities like Kansai U forging their own path.
Being able to plan research over 10 years sounds like a dream. Long-term perspective is exactly what's been missing in Japanese academia.
Let's be honest — this is also a branding strategy by the university administration wanting to create flagship research. It's not purely for the researchers' benefit.
In other countries, corporations often make long-term investments in university research, but Japan's industry-academia ties are weak. Doing this on their own is admirable.
You always hear stories about Nobel laureates struggling for funding in their early careers. With programs like this, maybe Japan could produce even more breakthroughs.
I wish there were long-term support like this for humanities research too... Large-scale funding always tends to go to STEM fields.
We have similar issues with the tenure-track system in the US. The gap between startup funds running out and landing an NIH grant is brutal. Having the university bridge that gap is a smart approach.
Indian universities lack research infrastructure at a fundamental level. Japan's problem is funding continuity, but our challenges are more basic. Still, there's a lot to learn from this model.
Germany has institutions like the Max Planck Society that provide long-term basic research support. The fact that Japanese universities have to do this individually seems like a systemic policy gap.
In Sweden, grant cycles are relatively long, but the fear of funding gaps is still real. A 10-year safety net would be great for researchers' mental health too.
$650K over 10 years? By US standards, the amount is modest, but doing this with a private university's own funds is significant. The question is whether it can scale.
Chinese universities receive generous government research funding, but the pressure is immense. Publication quotas often sacrifice quality. Japan's quality-focused approach is refreshing.
In France, CNRS research positions are stable, but university research budgets are always tight. The part about researchers spending time on paperwork instead of research really resonates.
As an Egyptian researcher, a 10-year stable research environment is literally a dream. If Japanese researchers still find this insufficient, it really puts the global gap in perspective.
South Korea faces the same issue. Teams fall apart after big projects like the BK program end. The 'development phase' that provides post-grant care is a model worth studying.
In the UK, the REF research assessment framework drives university funding decisions. The pressure to perform well pushes universities away from long-term basic research. Every country seems to face similar dilemmas.
Young researchers in Spain keep leaving the country due to unstable contracts and low pay. Japan seems to have similar issues with early-career researchers, but at least there are efforts to improve.
Nordic universities have guaranteed baseline research funding, so the Japanese situation of 'no grant, no research' is hard to relate to. But globally, the Japanese model might actually be more common.
In Brazil, research budgets swing wildly with every change of government. The idea of 10 years of stable support, insulated from political shifts, is something we can only envy.
Taiwanese universities face similar challenges. Research often stalls after NSTC project periods end. Kansai University's model is something Taiwan's private universities should seriously consider.
In Nigeria, the concept of university research funding barely exists. Many researchers self-fund their work. When Japanese researchers say funding is 'insufficient,' they're operating on an entirely different level.