Innovative Science

TL;DR

This paper discusses the complex, lengthy process of scientific funding, highlighting its evolution since 1970, and its impact on research practices and innovation.

Contribution

It provides an analysis of the historical development and current challenges of the scientific funding system.

Findings

Funding process is lengthy and complex

Only 25% of proposals are funded

Funding practices have changed significantly since 1970

Abstract

Sir, We write as senior scientists about a problem vital to the scientific enterprise and prosperity. Nowadays, funding is a lengthy and complex business. First, universities themselves must approve all proposals for submission. Funding agencies then subject those that survive to peer review, a process by which a few researchers, usually acting anonymously, assess a proposal's chances that it will achieve its goals, is the best value for money, is relevant to a national priority and will impact on a socio-economic problem. Only 25% of proposals received by the funding agencies are funded. These protracted processes force researchers to exploit existing knowledge, severely discourage open-ended studies and are hugely time-consuming. They are also new: before 1970, few researchers wrote proposals. Now they are virtually mandatory.