Are There Too Many Scientists?

Abstract

In their Letter “Declines in funding of NIH R01 research grants” (8 Sept. 2006, p. [1387][1]), H. G. Mandel and E. S. Vesell reiterated the widespread concern that the low level and recent decline in funding NIH R01 grants has long-term negative consequences for the future quality of science. Weinberg has also commented that the shift away from funding small, independent research groups is detrimental to the progress of science ([1][2]). I agree with these sentiments, but there is another side to the funding issue: Are there too many people trying to do science? In both the United States and Canada, the budgets of the major national agencies that fund biomedical research have more than doubled during the past decade. At least some of that money has made it to the pool that supports investigator-initiated research, yet excellent proposals from excellent researchers are still not being funded, and the situation has become worse in the past year ([2][3]). We could lobby for another doubling of the funding, but I see no reason to expect the outcome to be different: The total amount of science would increase, but the probability of continued funding and the perceived desirability of science as a career would not. Is there a point at which a society is doing enough science? Is science so important that we should always want to increase the rate at which we do it? Or is it like almost every other government-funded activity, where the proponents always want more even if we are not sure that more is better? If there were only 100 scientists applying for R01 grants each year, there would be widespread agreement that this is not enough to sustain a vibrant research enterprise; if there were a hundred million, even the most ardent supporters of research would agree that this is too many. The right number, or range of numbers, must be somewhere in between. We could lobby to keep doubling the funding and hope to reach the point where all of the good science was being funded. However, if funding for science is like funding for medical care, education, or war, there is no precedent to expect that increases in funding will ever match the ability to spend the funds, for better or worse. Alternatively, or in addition, if we don't like the model of funding that we have created, we should debate the merits of limiting the demand for research grants rather than just increasing the supply of money. 1. 1.[↵][4]1. R. A. Weinberg , Cell 126, 9 (2006). [OpenUrl][5][CrossRef][6][PubMed][7][Web of Science][8] 2. 2.[↵][9]1. J. Giles, 2. M. Wadman , Nature 443, 894 (2006). [OpenUrl][10][CrossRef][11][PubMed][12][Web of Science][13] [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.313.5792.1387b [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1. in text [5]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCell%26rft.stitle%253DCell%26rft.aulast%253DWeinberg%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%2BA.%26rft.volume%253D126%26rft.issue%253D1%26rft.spage%253D9%26rft.epage%253D10%26rft.atitle%253DA%2Blost%2Bgeneration.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252Fj.cell.2006.06.022%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F16839866%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [6]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cell.2006.06.022&link_type=DOI [7]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=16839866&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fsci%2F316%2F5822%2F200.1.atom [8]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000239224800006&link_type=ISI [9]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2. in text [10]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DNature%26rft.stitle%253DNature%26rft.aulast%253DLedford%26rft.auinit1%253DH.%26rft.volume%253D443%26rft.issue%253D7114%26rft.spage%253D894%26rft.epage%253D895%26rft.atitle%253DGrants%2Bfall%2Bvictim%2Bto%2BNIH%2Bsuccess.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1038%252F443894a%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F17065999%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [11]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/443894a&link_type=DOI [12]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=17065999&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fsci%2F316%2F5822%2F200.1.atom [13]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000241523400011&link_type=ISI