Scientists switch focus to security
By Rebecca Knight in Boston
Published: February 25 2007 23:01 | Last updated: February 25 2007 23:01
Scientists are looking to focus their research on defence and homeland security as federal funding for scientific grants becomes harder to come by.
According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, funding for non-defence research and development will shrink for the fourth consecutive year in fiscal 2008. The National Institutes of Health’s R&D budget will fall $325m (£166m, €247m) or 1.1 per cent, next year. “Funding conditions are forcing researchers to look outside their traditional boxes at places that they might not have looked at before – such as the Department of Homeland Security,” said Kei Koizumi, a director at the AAAS.
The DHS’s budget for R&D will dip slightly to $933m next year.
Some researchers are putting scientific questions in the context of security. Jeremy Wolfe, professor of ophthalmology at Harvard Medical School, who studies how the brain processes visual input, was granted $460,000 by the DHS. His lab will research why airport guards fail to notice items on scanner screens.
Prof Wolfe, who described himself as “comfortably funded by a combination of NIH and non-NIH entities”, said his research’s security emphasis would not harm its scientific integrity.
“I am dedicated to solving basic research problems. If as a part of that I can also be useful in an area like airport security, I don’t have any particular problem with that,” he said.
Scientists seeking money from the NIH and National Science Foundation have also turned to security. The NIH’s biodefence research portfolio will total $1.8bn in fiscal 2008. This had caused some scientists to “tailor their research to fit this priority”, Mr Koizumi said.
Thomas Cech, president of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, said an over-emphasis on practical application could have a negative impact on future scientific discoveries, which are typically the result of basic rather than applied research.
“Some countries have gone heavily in this direction where research is funded based on [how it will] boost the nation’s economy, but the evidence has been that it stifles creativity and true breakthroughs,” he said. “I think it’s fine to have some portion of the nation’s funding focused on outcome, but it’s worrying if it becomes a major slice of the pie.”
Scientists have long sought funding from federal agencies, and researchers in all disciplines often follow the money trail. But some have voiced concern.
“Part of the strength of the US system is that we do have multiple sources of funding and people understand why defence and homeland security are a much more important priority than they were even five years ago. But there is a frustration because these priorities are not everyone’s priorities,” Mr Koizumi said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment