Matthias Egger is the new president of the SNSF
Matthias Egger, internationally renowned epidemiologist and public health expert, will be the new president of the National Research Council of the SNSF as of 2017.

Send us a link
Matthias Egger, internationally renowned epidemiologist and public health expert, will be the new president of the National Research Council of the SNSF as of 2017.
This paper presents a novel model of science funding that exploits the wisdom of the scientific crowd. Each researcher receives an equal, unconditional part of all available science funding on a yearly basis, but is required to individually donate to other scientists a given fraction of all they receive. Science funding thus moves from one scientist to the next in such a way that scientists who receive many donations must also redistribute the most. As the funding circulates through the scientific community it is mathematically expected to converge on a funding distribution favored by the entire scientific community. This is achieved without any proposal submissions or reviews.
In an editorial in the 26 August issue of the journal Science, Jeremy Berg, the journal's 20th editor-in-chief, examines the importance of funding science steadily, with predictable budget cycles that allow science-funding agencies to do long-term planning that research projects typically require.
If we continue on the current path of adding ever tighter controls and conformities to research without understanding their effects on the impact and quality of that research, then we will likely be wasting money.
Thousands of conservation and environmental biologists must now survive two rounds of peer review before getting funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF). NSF says that the two-stage review process, which it launched 4 years ago as a pilot project in two divisions within its biology directorate, has resulted in a more manageable workload and fuller consideration of the highest-quality proposals.
Evaluation by the European Research Council (ERC) which serves as a pilot exercise for the future evaluation of ERC‐funded projects.
The European Research Council has begun to evaluate the impact of its grants; others should do the same.
Johns Hopkins University Press' Project MUSE online platform will host scholarly monographs and materials in humanities and social sciences.
A paper exploring the dynamics of interdisciplinary research in Italy over 10 years of scientific collaboration on research projects.
Aging of the NIH-funded independent investigator workforce is an accumulation of multiple factors including a shift in perceptions, expectations, and the general structure of the extramural workforce, as well as global macroeconomic factors.
The pilot focuses on replicating studies that have a large impact on science, government policy or the public debate.
Wellcome Trust looks to save money and time communicating the research it funds.
At a national cancer summit, Vice President Biden threatened to cut funds to medical research institutions that don't report their clinical trial results.
Paper examining whether federal research investment serves as a complement or substitute for state and local government, nonprofit, and industry research investment using the population of research-active academic science fields at U.S. doctoral granting institutions.
Winning a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is hard, especially if it's your first one. New data from a pilot project called the Early Career Reviewer (ECR) Program suggest that sitting in judgment of other grant applicants can help young scientists improve their odds when they apply for their own grants.
The world’s biggest science experiment may get more time and money for completion when nuclear officials convene on Wednesday in France.