IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v98y2017i4p1144-1150.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Waypoints for Evaluating Big Science

Author

Listed:
  • William Bianco
  • Donald Gerhart
  • Sean Nicolson†Crotty

Abstract

As illustrated by the articles in this volume, there are considerable gaps in the measurement of research productivity/innovation for programs enabled by large initial and ongoing infrastructure investments. Such programs include NASA's International Space Station, DOE's National Ignition Facility, NSF's Polar Program, and CERN's Large Hadron Collider. The enormous sums spent on these projects are often justified by predictions about their contributions to knowledge, the economy, or innovation. But at virtually any point in the lifecycle of a Big Science program, it is not easy to explain to the public, elected officials, and scientists whose proposals were rejected why the program is a compelling investment, given that all of the aforementioned benefits will emerge only over time—if at all.

Suggested Citation

  • William Bianco & Donald Gerhart & Sean Nicolson†Crotty, 2017. "Waypoints for Evaluating Big Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1144-1150, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:98:y:2017:i:4:p:1144-1150
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12467
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12467
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12467?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:98:y:2017:i:4:p:1144-1150. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.