ABSTRACT
Federal control, federal bureaucracy, and even funding instability might be tolerated as long as science remains innovative and creative. However, some observers have voiced concern that innovativeness and creativity have been stultified by what comes with federal support. Innovativeness may actually threaten continued support, as funding agencies may tend to look for a "sure thing." The General Accounting Office, in its study of peer review, quoted several critics to the effect that the present system of funding works against innovative research. A. L. Porter and Frederick Rossini comment that peer review is not appropriate for selecting proposals that are either particularly innovative or incorporate interdisciplinary research. An example of innovative research with important consequences is the work on chaos theory, which completely overturned the accepted wisdom in a great many scientific fields, particularly the physical sciences. There is strong agreement among researchers that the present research funding system stifles innovation, but researchers have not yet given up on being innovative.
