timeshighereducation documenta la protesta di un gruppo di scienziati britannici contro i criteri di finanziamento dei progetti di ricerca che privilegiano il ritorno economico (previsto nelle domande?!) degli stessi: “the group calls for academics to rebel against new rules that state that the potential financial or social effects of research must be highlighted in a two-page “impact summary” in grant applications.

The requirement to provide a summary, answering questions about who might benefit from the research and how a financial return could be ensured, is being phased in by the UK’s seven research councils. The summary will be used by peer reviewers as a factor when determining which applications receive funding.

But in the letter, the group, which includes eight fellows of the Royal Society, “urges” the peer reviewers to ignore the summaries – arguing that it is impossible to predict the economic impact of “blue-skies” research in advance”.