Funding Science with Science: Cryptocurrency and Independent Academic Research Funding

Scientific funding within the academy is an often complicated affair involving disparate and competing interests. Private universities, for instance, are vastly outpacing public institutions in garnering large, prestigious, science-related grants and external research investment. Inequities also extend to the types of research funded, with government, corporate, and even military interests privileging certain types of inquiry. This article proposes an innovative type of science research fund using cryptocurrencies, a fast-growing asset class. Although not a total funding solution, staking coins, specifically, can be strategically invested in to yield compound interest. These coins use masternode technologies to collateralize the network and speed transaction pace and may pay dividends to masternode holders, allowing institutions that purchase these types of central hubs to potentially engage in a lucrative form of dividend reinvestment. Using cryptocurrencies as a new funding stream may garner large amounts of capital and creation of nonprofit institutes to support the future of funding scientific research within educational institutions.

[1]  B. Kimball,et al.  The Beginning of “Free Money” Ideology in American Universities: Charles W. Eliot at Harvard, 1869–1909 , 2012, History of Education Quarterly.

[2]  H. Meyer,et al.  Autonomy or oligarchy? The changing effects of university endowments in winner-take-all markets , 2017 .

[3]  William N. Goetzmann,et al.  Educational Endowments in Crises , 2010, The Journal of Portfolio Management.

[4]  Henry A. Giroux.  Neoliberalism’s War against Higher Education and the Role of Public Intellectuals , 2015 .

[5]  Andrea Moro,et al.  The Boundaries of Babel: The Brain and the Enigma of Impossible Languages , 2008 .

[6]  Kristine F. Stepenuck,et al.  Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection , 2017 .

[7]  Kathryn Graziano.  The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail , 1998 .

[8]  M. Lawrence.  Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health , 2007 .

[9]  N. Denzin,et al.  Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. , 2005 .

[10]  Edward Lehner,et al.  Should the New England Education Research Organization Start a Journal in the Age of Audit Culture? Reflections on Academic Publishing, Metrics, and the New Academy , 2016 .

[11]  K. Tobin.  Sociocultural Perspectives on Science Education , 2012 .

[12]  Edward Lehner.  The return of the natural philosopher , 2010 .

[13]  Henry A. Giroux.  University in Chains: Confronting the Military-Industrial-Academic Complex , 2007 .

[14]  L. Wright,et al.  The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.) , 2006 .

[15]  J. Piccirillo,et al.  Addressing the Challenges for Otolaryngology Research to Inform Patient Care and Outcomes. , 2017, JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery.

[16]  Karolin Baecker,et al.  A Random Walk Down Wall Street , 2016 .

[17]  J. Ioannidis.  Defending Biomedical Science in an Era of Threatened Funding. , 2017, JAMA.

[18]  Robert J. Greer,et al.  What is an Asset Class, Anyway? , 1997 .

[19]  C. Shore,et al.  Beyond the multiversity: neoliberalism and the rise of the schizophrenic university , 2010 .

[20]  Edward Lehner,et al.  Describing students of the African Diaspora: Understanding micro and meso level science learning as gateways to standards based discourse , 2007 .

[21]  J. Boyd.  Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain: How a New Science Reveals Our Extraordinary Potential to Transform Ourselves. By Sharon Begley. 283 pp. Balantine Books, New York, 2008. $14.95 , 2009 .

[22]  Peter McLaren,et al.  Critical Pedagogy and Qualitative Research: Advancing the Bricolage , 2017 .

[23]  A. Olejniczak,et al.  The Effects of Scholarly Productivity and Institutional Characteristics on the Distribution of Federal Research Grants , 2010 .

[24]  M. Strathern.  The Tyranny of Transparency , 2000 .

[25]  Yvonna S. Lincoln,et al.  Ethics: The Failure of Positivist Science , 2017 .

[26]  Stephen F. Haller,et al.  The Role of Science in Public Policy: Higher Reason, or Reason for Hire? , 2007 .

[27]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Meeting the Challenge of Disruptive Change , 2000 .

[28]  Angela Calabrese Barton,et al.  Rethinking Scientific Literacy , 2004 .

[29]  B. Kimball.  The Rising Cost of Higher Education: Charles Eliot’s “Free Money” Strategy and the Beginning of Howard Bowen’s “Revenue Theory of Cost,” 1869−1979 , 2014 .