Big Bets, Long Bets: Investing in the Power of Ideas

When scientists hit barriers in their research – a discouraging batch of data, a disproven theory, contradictory findings – they don’t simply call it a day. They go back to the roots of the scientific method: assess the outcome, ask new questions, and puzzle out a new hypothesis and approach. 

This also applies to how science should be funded. 

In the decades I’ve spent as a clinician and scientist, at the bench as an immunology researcher, or in the field of global health and product development, I’ve experienced the promise, excitement, and frustration of it all. At the Gates Foundation, I led Covid-19 discovery and translational vaccine response efforts for a significant portfolio of vaccine candidates at one of the most critical periods for global health. My subsequent time at the Institute for Protein Design at the University of Washington School of Medicine focused on translational research, institute operations, and collaborations with global partners. I know the ins and outs of the science ecosystem from many vantage points, and I have seen firsthand how promising ideas can stall without the right support. This experience has taught me to look for novel approaches to ensure these ideas, which are not born fully formed, are nurtured into maturity.

I’ll start with a basic building block: why science and funding it matters. Scientific breakthroughs are the foundation of human progress, moving society forward with an understanding of the planet, biology, technology, and so much more. Science is a global enterprise, and to keep it that way, we must support innovation so impactful that it transcends borders, boundaries, and political lines at the frontier of what’s possible. 

Historically, science funding can be disjointed and siloed, preventing it from moving the needle on the biggest challenges of our time. Lack of long-term vision and a unified approach can impede progress. Conversely, the Covid-19 vaccine response showed what’s possible when the science community unites to solve a single, urgent problem. I witnessed the power of this collective problem-solving firsthand. It’s something the late Paul G. Allen, a great technologist and philanthropist, and his sister Jody knew well, and they built major collaborative efforts like the Allen Brain Atlas to harness it. This approach of breaking barriers to scientific progress through collaboration and imagination has driven me throughout my career, and it’s what will guide me as inaugural CEO of the just-launched Fund for Science and Technology (FFST). 

FFST, funded by the estate of Paul G. Allen, will exist to remove these barriers by enabling transformational science and technology efforts for the good of people and the planet, focusing on bioscience, environment, AI for good, and the intersections between them. At least $500 million in grants will be awarded over the first four years, starting with four initial grantees known for scientific excellence in our home city of Seattle – Benaroya Research Institute, College of the Environment at University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and Seattle Children’s – with plans to expand global impact in the coming months and years.

This commitment supports my belief in stepping outside the mold of science funding by focusing on big bets and long bets to find new solutions to the world’s biggest problems. To do this, we have to solve our perspective problem. The sector can have tunnel vision on short-term wins versus long-term payoff, but scientists need the assurance that their efforts will not halt prematurely. Paul once said, “…without risk, there is rarely significant reward, and unless we try truly novel approaches, we may never find the answers we seek.” This inspiration sparks a new grantmaking philosophy that embraces risk for high reward, makes long-term commitments, and takes ideas from concept to impact.

Foundational science is how this philosophy comes to life: focusing on upstream investments, supporting work from early ideation to solution, even if it takes years, and doing this at scale. Funders often require proof-of-concept before investing in a solution, but innovations can happen faster when they’re supported from the very beginning. This is especially critical in neglected or under-supported areas with high potential for impact, such as pediatric immunology or protecting biodiversity, but these areas may offer little commercial return. Philanthropic organizations can assume more risk in such areas, where private or public funding may not be able or willing to.

One of the most interesting things about working in philanthropy is the depth of the philanthropic toolkit. It’s not just about grantmaking. Philanthropies can also support purpose-aligned work through mechanisms like program-related investments, debt financing, and other tools. What I have learned from my time in philanthropy is that we need to deploy all of these financial tools to drive tangible impact. 

Action also needs to be taken in service of a more interconnected scientific community. Scientific research often operates in silos, and what has always been clear to me is that the greatest innovations happen at the intersections of key disciplines. The development and success of protein design is a perfect example of what’s possible when cross-disciplinary innovation is brought to bear; in this case, it was the confluence of AI and biochemistry that led to recent Nobel prize-winning breakthroughs in this field. While it is perhaps ambitious to wish for a transformed scientific ecosystem immediately, it’s what the sector needs and we should start building today, with urgency. Solutions to the problems we face cannot wait.

With science funding catapulted into the cultural conversation more than ever in the last year, it faces a critical inflection point. There is an opportunity to design a path forward that builds stability in the short term and opens doors in the long term for foundational and transformational science and technology solutions that will benefit our planet and its people. We as a scientific community must champion new approaches: investing in solutions for the neglected problems, betting on the long shots, accelerating collaboration, innovating with responsibility and ethics at the core, and scaling for a better-connected, flourishing ecosystem. 

Researchers work to make discoveries every day that improve lives, and the most promising ideas need the right support at the right time to come to fruition. We must remove barriers, rethink the status quo, and commit to a new vision for scientific funding and the ecosystem it supports. The next breakthrough could be at humanity’s fingertips. We can help make it happen.

Author bio:

Dr. Lynda Stuart is a physician-scientist with over 20 years of experience in immunology, global health, and product development. An advocate for leveraging cutting-edge technologies to solve the world’s toughest challenges, Stuart serves as President and CEO of the Fund for Science and Technology, which supports organizations working to advance bioscience, strengthen the environment, and harness the power of AI for the public good.

Stuart was previously Executive Director of the Institute for Protein Design at the University of Washington School of Medicine. Prior to this, she served as Vice President of Infectious Disease at BioNTech and Deputy Director for Vaccines & Biologics at the Gates Foundation. Notably, she led the foundation’s Covid-19 discovery and translational vaccine response efforts. She is a member of the scientific advisor committee for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation and a member of the Science and Technology Expert Group of the 100 Days Mission.

Photo: pe-art, Getty Images