Marginal budget changes in the R&D budget give very less information about the capacity of the science enterprise to contribute to the wide array of social objectives that justifies society's investment in science. The annual federal budget numbers for science cannot be understood unless they are placed in a broader political and historical context. The decentralization of influence over S&T budgeting in the federal government precludes any strategic approach to priority setting and funding allocations. Large changes mean that a particular priority has gained precedence over other, competing ones, and such situations are not only uncommon but usually related to a provoking political crisis. The role of peer review, smart managers, earmarks, block grants, and equity policies are all highly variable and reflect different institutional and national histories, politics, and cultures.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||Issues in science and technology|
|State||Published - Jun 1 2007|
ASJC Scopus subject areas