Natural Sciences Magazine recently published A Nature Bioscience editorial hails the use of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) as a revolutionary new way in which researchers working in underfunded scientific fields can create communities around their work and raise funding that might otherwise be unavailable.
In a DAO-based research scheme, project organization, fundraising, feedback, and the pipeline from discovery to product/industry can be handled by the same decentralized governing body.
According to the Nature article, overall workflow will also be streamlined compared to the status quo:
“Project proposals are sent to the DAO, and each DAO member can vote on whether a particular project should be funded. Members have tokens… to provide support and feedback on new project proposals. Research results are also submitted to the DAO as projects continue, enabling “For further feedback and engagement. Eventually, (hopefully) the project will end up in an IP-NFT (Intellectual Property Non-Fungible Token) – something like a patent, owned by the DAO and governed by all token holders.”
Funding can vary greatly from one scientific endeavor to another. During booms and busts, research in areas such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing may receive huge rewards from big tech companies, the government and pursuing investors, while sectors that may have previously been well-funded, such as Longevity, or those that were previously well-funded for example, may Women’s health issues, traditionally underfunded, are finding it increasingly difficult to fund Believe.
DAOs are built on blockchain technology. This allows them to operate on a digital ledger that is transparent and decentralized – meaning it is not controlled by a single entity or organization. In the world of science, this means that project funding and community interaction can be democratized.
Related: DAOs need to learn from Burning Man in order to become more widely adopted
Traditionally, those scientists who work at or with the most prestigious institutions — major universities in high-GDP countries, government institutions and contractors, big technology companies and big pharmaceutical companies — not only receive the most funding, but also have access to the most of potential financing.
This distinction is important because as scientists leave geographic areas with less funding to pursue research in wealthier areas, the “brain drain” associated with migration becomes less important. Aggravation.
Because DAOs do not necessarily have to respect boundaries (although the legalities surrounding their work can vary by location), they can be governed by the needs and desires of the scientists conducting the research, not the state, university or sponsoring company. He. She.
Ultimately, the Nature editorial team concluded that DAOs could become an important platform for underfunded researchers, but their adoption would require more education.
“Part of this challenge is to help potential members realize that the DAO is not just a funding body,” the staff writes, “but also a community of people who care deeply about supporting a particular scientific cause.”