Academics should not allocate research funds

It’s long been the case that the greatest barrier to the advancement of a UK involvement in manned space exploration programme has been the vested interests of the scientific establishment. Distinguished academic prima donnas have a tendency to allocate research funds to their own pet projects (or to at least vote down expensive projects that may compete for funds with their own). Now we learn that the disgraceful decision to close the Jodrell Bank observatory was made by other scientists protecting their vested interests [The Times].

This state of affairs in unacceptable. Left to their own devices it’s only natural for scientists to allocate funds to projects closer to their own interests. Yet even on a broader perspective it should not be for the scientific community to decide who taxpayer funded research grants should be allocated. Science has benefits far beyond the sake of science itself. There are not just the tangible benefits such as improvement to health and quality of life. There are also intangible benefits such as inspiring future generations. Scientists alone are not best placed to weigh up all these pros and cons.

Of course it’s right that scientists should be involved in the decision-making process – any funding body needs to include expert members. But the funding council boards should not consist of expert members exclusively. As with other public bodies there should be a diversity of skills, knowledge and experience, with a lay majority, so that future decisions can be made to reflect the overall interests and priorities of society, not the scientific establishment.

Twitter Plurk Buzz Delicious Digg Facebook MySpace Reddit Stumble