How I Secured a PhD Grant with a 2,9% Success Rate and You Can Too

Introduction

In 2024, I successfully defended a PhD in Law at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, Italy. The EUI, established in the early 1970s by the six founding EU member states, is an English-speaking research institution specializing in social sciences.

The EUI offers highly competitive PhD programs funded through grants distributed by EU member states to their own nationals or to those who earned a degree in their country. Some grants are relatively low competition, with around four applicants per place, while others are highly competitive. I received a grant from the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, designated for nationals of several non-EU states. It is one of the most competitive EUI grants, with only four or five awarded each year from a pool of around 200 applicants – a success rate of 2.9%.

Unlike many doctoral programs where students apply to join an existing project, EUI applicants must apply with their own research proposal. The application process involves multiple stages: an initial written submission, followed by interviews for shortlisted candidates, and a meeting between EUI representatives and the relevant funding authorities to make the final selection. Importantly, students are involved in each of these stages. As a doctoral researcher, I participated as a student observer in all stages of the process.

Drawing from my experience, I would like to share insights on developing a compelling research proposal for such rigorous selection processes.

Provide Sufficient Background

Applicants often overestimate how familiar selection committees will be with their topic. While the panel typically includes broad experts in your field, they are not necessarily specialists in your specific sub-field. The selection committee does not know your research. You do. It is your responsibility to explain it to them.

I once spoke with a prospective PhD applicant who insisted I wouldn’t understand her research proposal because she worked in public international law and my expertise was in private international law. I wondered what she thought the selection process looked like and whether she thought a university would hand-select a tailor-made panel only to evaluate her application.

Usually, you’ll have a mixed panel, and if they don’t understand your research, it’s deemed to be your communication failure, not their shortcoming.

Identify a Problem

At the heart of every research proposal is a problem you’re trying to solve. While you do need to identify a gap in the literature, it’s not enough. The literature gap in and of itself does not speak to the need of further research – maybe no one’s written about the subject because there is nothing to research. A good proposal is about uncovering a real-world issue that affects people, systems, or the environment and urgently needs to be addressed.

Ask yourself:

• What is the problem my research addresses?
• Who is affected by this problem, and how?
• Why does this problem matter right now?

Clearly articulating the problem makes your proposal grounded in reality.

Also, make sure that your chosen institution isn’t already invested in the issue you’re interested to explore. If a university has just funded a PhD project on circular economy, offering another proposal on the same topic, even with a different angle, can be risky. I’ve seen people fail because they didn’t check this.

Emphasize the Urgency

Once you’ve identified the problem, convey its urgency (agitate). Why does this issue need immediate attention? What are the consequences of leaving it unresolved? Use concrete examples, data, or scenarios to highlight the importance of addressing the issue promptly. The goal is to demonstrate to the selection committee that the problem cannot be ignored.

Propose a Solution

Now, it’s time for you to step in as the hero. This is where you present your project as a meaningful response to the problem. Your proposal should show how your research will address the issue directly and why your approach is both feasible and original. You don’t have to solve the problem completely, but you do have to demonstrate how your work moves the conversation forward.

Articulate the Methodology

Methodology is often the weakest section of PhD proposals, especially in law. Be clear and specific. How exactly will you answer your research question? Why is this the best approach? What sources will you use? What is the geographical scope of your proposed work? What limitations do you anticipate?

The committee wants to see that your proposal is methodologically sound and that you’ve thought through how to conduct your research, not just what the topic is.

Show You’re Qualified

You need to be the right person to execute the proposed research. The committee wants reassurance that you have (or are on track to acquire) the skills and background needed.

Ask yourself:

• Have I worked on a related topic before, for example, in my master’s thesis?

• Do I speak the language required to access relevant sources?
• Am I familiar with the region that I plan to study?
• Am I taking steps to gain the necessary knowledge or skills?

For instance, if you propose to study Colombian truth commissions but have no background in Latin American studies and don’t speak Spanish, the committee will question the project’s feasibility.

Control What You Can

The truth is, the outcome of the selection process is beyond your control. You can’t control who else applies. You can’t control your would-be supervisor’s current research interests and priorities.

However, you can control the quality of your application.

One of the most common mistakes I’ve observed is people giving up before they’ve even started. They treat the process as a lottery, not in the sense that multiple factors influence the outcome, but in the sense that nothing they do will matter. So they don’t put in the necessary effort.

But committees can only evaluate what they see. They can’t evaluate you on your potential or guess what you could have written if you’d believed in your chances. They can only judge you on the documents you actually submitted.

Take the process seriously. Put together the best application you can. Then, once it’s submitted, let go. You’ve done your part.

Final Thoughts

I hope this was helpful for you.

If you'd me to review your research proposal or help you with any part of it, you are welcome to read about my process and reach out for 1-on-1 work.

I wish you best of luck! ☺️