Abstract
AbstractAs illustrated by the articles in this volume, there are considerable gaps in the measurement of research productivity/innovation for programs enabled by large initial and ongoing infrastructure investments. Such programs include NASA's International Space Station, DOE's National Ignition Facility, NSF's Polar Program, and CERN's Large Hadron Collider. The enormous sums spent on these projects are often justified by predictions about their contributions to knowledge, the economy, or innovation. But at virtually any point in the lifecycle of a Big Science program, it is not easy to explain to the public, elected officials, and scientists whose proposals were rejected why the program is a compelling investment, given that all of the aforementioned benefits will emerge only over time—if at all.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
