<p>This paper offers a qualitative discussion about the possibility of achieving a more balanced relationship between excellence (via meritocracy) and pluralism (via diversity) in the allocation of public funding in economic research. The historical and methodological transformations that have shaped the discipline call for abandoning a strict meritocratic approach to funding in favour of supporting more varied research projects that still meet high standards of scientific research. Such an approach would help avoid distorting the endogenous evolution of economics, encouraging the development of new alternative research programs and fields alongside the traditional mainstream orthodox neoclassical perspective. Accordingly, we argue that the historical and methodological evolution of a discipline should be considered among the possible criteria policymakers adopt for funding research allocation. To support this argument, we first examine how mainstream pluralism has progressively counterbalanced economic imperialism, thus calling for a more inclusive definition of meritocracy that fosters major diversity also in funding allocation. We then offer a Schumpeterian interpretation of advantages and limitations of both strict meritocratic and pluralistic approaches to funding. The paper concludes with some policy recommendations to promote diversity in research funding as a means to reduce inequalities in academic contexts, particularly within the so-called “dismal science”.</p>