Edwards Marc A, Roy Siddhartha
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, Virginia.
Environ Eng Sci. 2017 Jan 1;34(1):51-61. doi: 10.1089/ees.2016.0223.
Over the last 50 years, we argue that incentives for academic scientists have become increasingly perverse in terms of competition for research funding, development of quantitative metrics to measure performance, and a changing business model for higher education itself. Furthermore, decreased discretionary funding at the federal and state level is creating a hypercompetitive environment between government agencies (e.g., EPA, NIH, CDC), for scientists in these agencies, and for academics seeking funding from all sources-the combination of perverse incentives and decreased funding increases pressures that can lead to unethical behavior. If a critical mass of scientists become untrustworthy, a tipping point is possible in which the scientific enterprise itself becomes inherently corrupt and public trust is lost, risking a new dark age with devastating consequences to humanity. Academia and federal agencies should better support science as a public good, and incentivize altruistic and ethical outcomes, while de-emphasizing output.
我们认为，在过去50年里，就研究资金的竞争、衡量科研绩效的量化指标的制定以及高等教育自身不断变化的商业模式而言，对学术科学家的激励措施已变得越来越不合理。此外，联邦和州一级可自由支配资金的减少，正在政府机构（如美国环境保护局、国立卫生研究院、疾病控制与预防中心）之间、这些机构的科学家之间以及寻求各种资金来源的学者之间营造出一种竞争异常激烈的环境——不合理的激励措施与资金减少相结合，增加了可能导致不道德行为的压力。如果相当数量的科学家变得不可信，就有可能出现一个临界点，即科学事业本身变得内在腐败，公众信任丧失，从而有可能迎来一个新的黑暗时代，给人类带来毁灭性后果。学术界和联邦机构应更好地将科学作为一种公共利益加以支持，激励利他和符合道德的成果，同时淡化科研产出。
