To supercharge science, first experiment with how it is funded

The transformationgdpGPS unleashed by increased funding for science during the 20th century is nothing short of remarkable. In the early 1900s research was a cottage industry mostly funded by private firms and philanthropy. Thomas Edison electrified the world from his industrial lab at Menlo Park, and the Carnegie Corporation was the principal backer of Edwin Hubble. Advances in science during the second world war—from the development of radar to the atom bomb—led governments and companies to scale things up. By the mid-1960s America’s federal government was spending 0.6% of on research funding and the share of overall investment in research and development rose to nearly 3%. Inventions including the internet, and space telescopes followed.That dynamism is fizzling out. A growing body of work shows that even as the world spends more on research, the bang for each extra buck has fallen. One explanation for this is that the way science is funded is out of date. Researchers must now contend with a daunting amount of bureaucracy. The rate at which grant applications are accepted has fallen, meaning more of them must be made. Two-fifths of a top scientist’s time is spent on things other than research, such as looking for money. One study found that researchers spent a combined 614 years applying for grants from a single funding body in Australia in 2014 alone. Risky ideas are often put aside.