The House Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held a meeting today (Thursday, Oct. 8th) to discuss investing in more high-risk, high-reward research. The NIH wasn’t at the meeting, but Neal Lane from Rice University, representing the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, James Collins from NSF, Richard McCullough from Carnegie Mellon University, and Gerald Rubin from HHMI were there to tell members of Congress about why the US needs to invest more money in high-risk, high-reward research and how to go about distributing it. When I listened in on the hearing, one thing especially surprised me: needed to push their proposals Congressman Vern Ehlers (Mich-R) asked how agencies could increase grants to young scientists under these new funding initiatives since they often lack the experience and credibility through the application process. To me, this suggests that young researchers are by definition high-risk high-reward.
It all left me wondering: this term is thrown around a lot, but what exactly does “high-risk, high-reward” mean? In the hearing they defined it as the National Science Board does – “unique ideas and sometimes unconventional approaches that have the potential to create new models or fields within science and engineering or radically change our understanding of a current concept.” But that’s a bit broad, no?
Do you think funding bodies — and Congress — need a better definition of “high-risk, high-reward” research? Where do young researchers fit into that definition?’
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/0/692.page#3602
-The Scientist.
Comment:
What is this -High Risk ,High Rewards? Are we thinking in terms of running a business corporation?In Science, especially in Theory aspect of it, it needs time to collate facts after a general Premise, find individual cases, ,create conditions,conduct experiments and provide proof.You can not, at one shot, form a theory and prove it instantly.
This is not a joke and jokers a.k.a politicians are not qualified to decide on this issue.Panel of eminent academics may examine the soundness of the theory, on case to case basis( as new theories may not be in consonance with existing theories) and recommend what to choose and proceed.
Age has no relevance in Science.