Science eats its seed corn

An essay in PLoS Biology observes that the state of granting in science is having a chilling effect on research, by selecting for a lack of originality and allowing too short a time frame to plan and undertake research. As a result, scientists are dropping out of doing science altogether early in what should have been their careers. As the author, Peter Lawrence, says, having described the plight of “K” (not the Kafka character, but close):

K.’s plight (an authentic one) illustrates how the present funding system in science eats its own seed corn[2]. To expect a young scientist to recruit and train students and postdocs as well as producing and publishing new and original work within two years (in order to fuel the next grant application) is preposterous. It is neither right nor sensible to ask scientists to become astrologists and predict precisely the path their research will follow—and then to judge them on how persuasively they can put over this fiction. It takes far too long to write a grant because the requirements are so complex and demanding. Applications have become so detailed and so technical that trying to select the best proposals has become a dark art.

This is not confined to the sciences, of course, but it is particularly problematic there. I have watched a number of academics struggle to find funding while trying to run an existing research project. One almost needs to have done the present project altogether before you apply for the funds.