With constant pressure to secure funding, an effective research scientist can't afford to sit around a lab and merely strive for infinite knowledge. If that was all they ever focused on, funding would soon dry up, leaving potentially groundbreaking projects only half-finished.
A successful research scientist is also a fundraiser, subject to economic realities. In the wake of the current global economic crisis, the prospects for many may seem bleak.
At this year's American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting, held last week in Chicago, the scientific community grappled with the issue of the world's financial problems and sought new answers.
A fundamental question in the new global economy is how science should be integrated to optimize its benefits to society. The development of scientific research remains an essential way to create economic growth for the future. However, countries face great pressure to sustain their current finances, with limited opportunities to think ahead.
We need to rethink how the global economy operates,"" said Dr. Richard Bissell of the National Research Council at a talk titled ""Science and Technology Policies and the Changing Global Economy.""
With the realities of climate change upon us, scientists will certainly play an enormous role in maintaining the health and prosperity of humanity.
Climate change will create a great deal of challenges in many aspects of economic development, including combatting new patterns of disease, engineering a more efficient energy infrastructure and promoting new ways of securing food supplies. But without the funding science so sorely needs, scientific research will be unable to meet any of these challenges.
For centuries, much of the global economy was dedicated to the sciences surrounding resource extraction. Technologies have advanced to the point where even the most seemingly impenetrable environments can be exploited with relative economic ease, but today's environmental realties pressure us to cut our reliance upon these resources. Doing so requires serious investment, and one major concern is few will be able to contribute funds toward developing the next generation of wealth-building technologies.
A recent article in the New York Times claimed the United States has an ""investment deficit disorder,"" citing the country's recent lack of spending on national infrastructure and energy, focusing instead on the business of wealth-building. Instead of making bridges, we were only making money. Funding for research at universities fell victim to this mentality, and many now face an uncertain future with the recent economic collapse.
""How do we envision the future of our universities, particularly our research universities? Both the publics and the privates in this country are under severe stress,"" Bissell said. ""We need to work harder to find what are the outcomes of the educational system that we want to have in terms of science, rather than just observe the past.""
Bissell also emphasized the importance of rebuilding the scientific cooperation of the world, as global relations now depend on research and technology's ability to protect the health of the environment.
""It's my stance,"" Bissell said, ""that the research sector could actually provide central hope in a world which is likely to otherwise face rising trade protectionism, additional political military conflicts stemmed by poverty and social discord. If you take surveys around the world of people, you will find that indeed the publics believe that science is an avenue towards a better future.""
This year's AAAS meeting was also filled with a message of hope for the future of science as a national priority, particularly in light of President Barack Obama's inaugural promise: ""We will restore science to its rightful place."" The scientific community is about to experience the benefits of this new political era, as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 promises up to $17 billion in funding for science organizations, including up to $3 billion for the National Science Foundation.
Dr. Neal Lane, a former NSF Director, views the stimulus package as incredibly beneficial for the future of science, as he stated in his address at a symposium titled ""White House Science Advice for a New Environment.""
""The argument that I think that won the day,"" Lane said, ""was that the investments in science not only create jobs right away, which they do, but they also help address national priorities, like energy, health and climate change, and they pay very handsome future dividends, as many economic studies have shown.
