Hölling, Hanna BarbaraHanna BarbaraHöllingChristian Paul2025-02-182025-02-182024https://doi.org/10.24451/dspace/11399https://arbor.bfh.ch/handle/arbor/44586The word “competition” comes to mind when we consider academic writing intended for funding applications. How can we frame a proposal to distinguish it from the multitude of other scientific inquiries? How can we meet the criteria, desires, and preferences of those empowered to provide funding? How can we package our research into a conveyable, straightforward narrative that is simultaneously complex enough to sustain itself through multiple rounds of critical scrutiny? In conservation, despite its critical framework and evolving academic status, securing grants remains challenging due to traditional preferences for established disciplines such as art history and natural sciences. Switzerland, however, offers a supportive landscape through the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), recognized for its detailed, constructive feedback and extensive financial support across research fields. Despite the growing inclusion of advanced research in conservation, many Swiss programs remain practice-oriented, limiting integration with research-driven curricula. The rare leadership of SNSF-funded projects by conservators highlights the need for a shift toward research and academic inclusivity. Success in conservation must reconcile theory and practice, fostering a collaborative culture that embraces diversity in scholarship and professional engagement. Progress lies in collective efforts to meet contemporary challenges and realize conservation’s full potential.enSNSFGrantFundingCompetitionmagazine_article