Important thread. Our science funding models are not designed for pandemics.
Paging smart people who think about this: @patrickc @tylercowen @ericries @samahttps://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1245251019354836992 …
-
-
To borrow a formulation from
@robinhanson that might apply: "Science funding is not about scientific progress" (What is it really about, then?) -
Arguably, our science funding models aren't designed.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Clearly not
-
One thought - what if a set of awards with follow on grants were setup that didn’t require grant applications but were awarded based on recent work & came with few restrictions (other than basics like perhaps publishing in open journals/sharing data sets etc)
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
There may be an optimal ecosystem of funding models and the weight of the current grant model is too large wrt what I think would be ideal. Like there are strategic X reserves for materials, there could be an strategic pile of money for urgent research
-
The problem is that by the time something is a pandemic, it's too late. What we need is a way to encourage NIH etc. to be countercyclical and fund things that won't pay off for a decade, rather than what these articles describe: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/10/fluctuating-funding-and-flagging-interest-hurt-coronavirus-research/ …https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/01/30/coronavirus-treatment-vaccine-cure/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
into a cash-starved system (research)
1/n