• Question: do you ever feel like its a shame that the government doesn't put money into certain scientific breakthroughs that could benefit society?

    Asked by rossbridges to Alan, Becky, Jo, Sankar, Sarah on 11 Mar 2015.
    • Photo: Sarah Kirk

      Sarah Kirk answered on 11 Mar 2015:

      This is an excellent question. The government is actually quite happy to fund a lot of science, especially if they think it will make money or will quickly produce results that can be used for new technologies.

      It is harder to get money some of the more unusual research, especially if it is not obvious what it is useful for in the real world. But fundamental science (understanding the basics of the world around us) is very important. For example, if no one had done research on atoms, it would be impossible to do any of the chemistry we do today!

      I think the government needs to put money into what we call ‘blue skies research’, as it lays the groundwork for all the other research to happen.

    • Photo: Becky Gregory

      Becky Gregory answered on 11 Mar 2015:

      I think this is a very important point. The government often try and fund, through research councils, what they think of as research and science that will benefit society in some way. However, I do not think that the amount of projects or funding they give to science is enough, and so some breakthroughs may not get enough money to advance in the real world. There are also so many different areas of science that need funding, that it is often hard to distinguish what projects are the most deserving of the government’s money.
      I do think, however, that not enough money goes into funding research into diseases or conditions which millions of people suffer from, as many charities often have to raise the funds themselves for this research to go ahead (Cancer Research UK being a good example).

    • Photo: Alan McCue

      Alan McCue answered on 11 Mar 2015:

      Excellent question – It is a tough one because we don’t always know how important an discovery is going to be at the time therefore some goods ideas don’t get funded and other ideas which don’t end up as successful don’t get funded. You might think that the best idea would be to let the scientists decide but then that also has its problems – scientists might choose ideas which are exciting but not especially useful (sometimes!). I guess the best balance is to have input from government and scientists so that a joint decision about funding can be made. It is a tough question though!

Comments