Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

One big science project or 1000 smaller ones?


Affiliations
1 International Joint Informatics Laboratory and Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
2 Nottingham University Business School (China), University of Not-tingham Ningbo China, Ningbo 315100, China
 

Historical experiences show that big science projects such as Manhattan, Apollo, LHC and the Human Genome Project often need large investment and inevitably consume significant socio-economic resources, whereas small science projects need only small investment. While most big science projects are based on known scientific principles, smaller ones explore unknowns that may result in breakthroughs, some of which may lead to Nobel Prizes. Closing one big science project may afford 1000 small science projects quantitatively. As such, decision-making on a big science project is not only a scientific issue, but also a socio-economic one. Based on the cost–benefit analysis of LHC (big science) and CNAO (small science), we found that small science projects have a higher benefit/cost ratio. At least three policy effects need to be considered: (1) Decision on investing in a big science project should consider both scientific and socio-economic merits. (2) Small science projects could be more effective than bigger ones in exploring the scienti­fic frontier. (3) Replacing one big science project with many small science ones might benefit the scientific enterprise.

Keywords

Big and small science, Nobel Prize, cost–benefit analysis, socio-economic merits.
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • One big science project or 1000 smaller ones?

Abstract Views: 404  |  PDF Views: 166

Authors

Shelia X. Wei
International Joint Informatics Laboratory and Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
Howell Y. Wang
International Joint Informatics Laboratory and Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
Cong Cao
Nottingham University Business School (China), University of Not-tingham Ningbo China, Ningbo 315100, China
Fred Y. Ye
International Joint Informatics Laboratory and Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China

Abstract


Historical experiences show that big science projects such as Manhattan, Apollo, LHC and the Human Genome Project often need large investment and inevitably consume significant socio-economic resources, whereas small science projects need only small investment. While most big science projects are based on known scientific principles, smaller ones explore unknowns that may result in breakthroughs, some of which may lead to Nobel Prizes. Closing one big science project may afford 1000 small science projects quantitatively. As such, decision-making on a big science project is not only a scientific issue, but also a socio-economic one. Based on the cost–benefit analysis of LHC (big science) and CNAO (small science), we found that small science projects have a higher benefit/cost ratio. At least three policy effects need to be considered: (1) Decision on investing in a big science project should consider both scientific and socio-economic merits. (2) Small science projects could be more effective than bigger ones in exploring the scienti­fic frontier. (3) Replacing one big science project with many small science ones might benefit the scientific enterprise.

Keywords


Big and small science, Nobel Prize, cost–benefit analysis, socio-economic merits.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv121%2Fi4%2F479-484