Decentralized Science (DeSci): Restructuring Scientific Research
In 2000, over 30% of grant applications for the National Institutes of Health, the dominant source of American federal science funding, were approved. In 2021, this approval rate dropped to 19%. The science community has, in these recent years, experienced challenges arising from increasing bureaucracy and gatekeeping. As a result, less time is spent on the actual research and experimentation, which stifle creativity and academic quality.
The decentralized science (DeSci) movement was created in response to this problem. By leveraging blockchain technology such as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), DeSci ushers in a transition from centralized research and public funding institutions into decentralized ownership and access. Instead of pay-walled journals, DeSci promotes open-source information. Instead of using middlemen such as traditional publishers who may cause bias, DeSci seeks help from the community.
Why DeSci is important
The primary issue scientists face is funding, as research is generally costly. Many projects require additional assistants, lab equipment, and other materials. As illustrated in the aforementioned statistic, the grant approval rate is decreasing, which breeds more competition. This massively influences scientists to cater their proposals based on what they think the funding institution would want. Gary Bennett, a Duke neuroscientist, says funding “affects what we study, what we publish, the risks we take,” and that it “nudges us to emphasize safe, predictable science.” Depending on who funds the research, biases can also arise, such as when nutritional science research is funded by the food industry or drug clinical trials are funded by pharmaceutical companies.
Another hurdle the scientific community has to overcome is access to information. Journals often charge high prices for subscriptions that libraries, let alone individuals, have a hard time affording. The chart below shows just how aggressive academic journal pricing has become. The Center of Open Science was created in 2013 to solve this problem with various efforts that encourage scientists to observe, contribute, and create with one another. While the movement has had many successes, it may have inadvertently come at a detriment to certain parties. An example is the journals switching to a pay-to-publish model, which scientist Shaun Khoo says could be more costly to researchers.
How DeSci can solve these problems
Blockchain-based funding allows researchers to tap into the $986 billion market cap cryptocurrency market as well as new incentive structures that come from adopting unique tokens. Niklas Rindtorff, the founder of LabDAO, a community-run network of wet and dry laboratories, says “tokenomics can generate new mechanism design and incentives. In a time where most academic research is following the same set of incentives, I am hopeful new funding agencies and tokenomics models can help diversify the ways research is being done.” Through tokens, investors can receive partial ownership and possibly profits — which all incentivizes funding. Raising funding decentrally can also reduce biases, as scientists can seek grants from communities that have a wider range of members with different backgrounds.
In the traditional scientific funding model, research is rarely made on diseases that only affect a small number of individuals. Since the market is small and thus less likely to provide a better return on investment compared to more common diseases, the pharmaceutical companies do not have much incentive to proceed. Being able to tap into more sources and introduce a monetary stake in the result of the research increases the chances that funding goals will be hit.
Similar incentives can be applied to solve the gatekeeping problem. Currently, there are only a few scientific journals considered prestigious, which gives them strict power over the scientific community. These publications charge thousands in processing fees which severely limits the sharing of information. By rewarding the publishing of content based on an objective set of metrics decentrally, scientists will be more encouraged to produce quality research. Tools like the InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) help facilitate these principles.
Examples of DeSci projects
Even though the DeSci movement is relatively new and lesser-known compared to industries like DeFi, there are already projects that have made significant progress.
VitaDAO is focused on funding longevity research. It is governed by VITA tokens which can be acquired either through purchases or contributions. This tokenomics structure incentivizes both investors and researchers who are passionate about the VitaDAO mission. So far, they have sourced over 200 research projects, funded over $2.5 million in research, own a treasury of over $6 million, and have an active online community of over 5000 members.
Molecule Protocol is a decentralized funding platform that operates similar to a marketplace since it connects researchers who are looking to access funding with investors looking to invest in specific projects. The projects and intellectual property are attached to NFTs, making them liquid and transferable. There are currently over 250 research projects listed on Molecule with access to 3 Bio DAOs with over $10 million in their network and over 4,500 other community members.
SCINET allows retail and institutional investors to directly invest in scientific research securely and authentically through blockchain technology. While serving as a fund, SCINET also offers a cloud laboratory, a decentralized peer review process, and the ability to document intellectual property on the blockchain.
Conclusion
The scientific community has faced multiple barriers due to centralization and profit-seeking middlemen. DeSci is a movement that takes the Web3 ethos of decentralization and various blockchain tools to improve science. While DeSci efforts in the past have found success, it is still unclear whether the mainstream academic community will materially adopt their protocols. What is clear, though, is that DeSci opens the scientific world to a fresh opportunity that reevaluates who exactly this research serves and how to build toward a more inclusive future.
