Pushing the complexity barrier: diminishing returns in the sciences

TL;DR

This paper argues that scientific progress exhibits diminishing returns relative to funding, with evidence from life expectancy and weather prediction improvements, suggesting smaller projects may be more resource-efficient.

Contribution

It provides an analysis of diminishing returns in science funding and advocates for supporting multiple small to medium projects over few large ones.

Findings

Science funding shows sub-linear returns in measurable progress.

Supporting many small projects is more resource-efficient.

Evidence from life expectancy and weather prediction advances.

Abstract

Are the sciences not advancing at an ever increasing speed? We contrast this popular perspective with the view that science funding may actually see diminishing returns, at least regarding established fields. In order to stimulate a larger discussion, we investigate two exemplary cases, the linear increase in human life expectancy over the last 170 years and the advances in the reliability of numerical short and medium term weather predictions during the last 50 years. We argue that the outcome of science and technology (S&T) funding in terms of measurable results is a highly sub-linear function of the amount of resources committed. Supporting a range of small to medium size research projects, instead of a few large ones, will be, as a corollary, a more efficient use of resources for science funding agencies.