The present ecosystem for scientific research is prim, proper and full of checks and balances. It also moves at a glacial pace. Scientists conduct research and publish their findings as papers, which are then reviewed by ‘peers’ (other scientists in the same field of study). If enough ‘peers’ deem the research valid, it’s accepted as a new discovery/finding.

While we may be inclined to write off this existing system as complete trash (because well, time is money), it does have a few things going for it. For starters, research reviewed and accepted by the ‘peer system’ is valid, implementable or experimentable and not a random theory. But in all honesty, that’s where the advantage(s) end.

The system doesn’t really incentivize experimental research, innovation or interest based research. Most research in the 21st century is undertaken by two distinct sets of populations. One, academicians and scientists, who either work for the government or an academic institution. And two, global corporations that research and innovate to improve their product offerings. Most 21st century innovations we’ve come to take for granted have been brought to us by the second set, corporations.

The gatekeepers; namely government agencies, institutions and corporations, exhibit an alarming amount of control over what research is undertaken and published. These huge organizations have their own research objectives, which means resources are channeled toward accomplishing those rather than undertaking research that entails bigger benefits for society.

These limitations and restrictions rankle the researchers themselves more than anyone else. Many research scientists have several projects they never got the funding to look into, or have had to abandon due to political and other pressures.

Still the new kid on the block, DeSci intends to ungate scientific funding, unleash knowledge from paywalled silos (heard of Jstor?), stop reliance on profit-hungry intermediaries and massively enhance all-round collaboration.

The Open Science movement took off about a year ago, with a primary focus to combat the paywall problem. Publishers subsequently moved from a pay-to-read model to a pay-to-publish model. So now readers don’t have to pay, but scientists who want to publish their research must pay a publishing fee (with some publishers charging ridiculous amounts to publish a single paper!). Earlier, accessing research was a problem. Now, even publishing it is.

DeSci, while aligned with the Open Science movement, is a completely different cause. The biggest difference that DeSci brings to the research table is leveraging blockchain tools to empower collaboration and democratize access. This may sound similar to how Web3 and the blockchain are disrupting other industries, because it is. But you’ve got to admit, blockchain being leveraged by the scientific community to improve research is pretty cool.

The ‘De’ in DeSci obviously stands for decentralised. Here’s how that works.

Traditional research funding is decided by analyzing several factors like market opportunity, development cost and ease of implementation. In academia, researchers spend half their careers writing grant proposals, most of which never get accepted. With Web3, researchers can be financially supported by crowdfunding or democratically decided allocations. This is already happening, with DAOs like VitaDao, Impetus Grants, and Gitcoin funding projects in the $100K-$1M range, in the aging/longevity field. If this keeps up, researchers can gradually reduce dependence on traditional funding.

DeSci can also redefine how research is published. Today, journals like Nature, Science and Cell charge you to publish your research. But if you’re a researcher who needs funding, and you’re on Web3, you could theoretically secure funding by simply preprinting your research on servers like BioRxiv, MedRxiv, and Arxiv. This could help you complete research and put it out into the world sooner, circumventing the elaborate and time-consuming peer review system.

In the US, the FDA is overburdened with a huge backlog. Meaning, only large corporations with huge resources can get their products tested and pushed to market on time. With DeSci, the underlying collaborative tools can empower research anywhere in the world, helping us progress and innovate our medicine faster.

For example, trials for treating conditions more prevalent in certain geographical regions are far easier to conduct in those regions, but this isn’t something that’s prevalently done now. DeSci can enable this, alongside deeper collaboration between doctors and pharmaceutical researchers.

Under the present system, drug development costs are extremely high, often costing billions of dollars and between 5-10 years. Patents are a critical part of the system as profits take time. If clinical trials are decentralized, more experiments can be conducted, and cheaper. This inevitably leads to faster, more cost-efficient drug development.

Faster development means that the drugs hit market sooner. And thanks to decentralisation, it’s also cheaper. When a type of treatment becomes cheap enough that doctors and patients together prefer it, how can other drug makers undercut? Point being, the faster you hit shelves, the better researchers are protected against other players stealing their work.

With crypto, the general public can help pay for this research, bypassing conglomerates and traditional authoritative bodies. There’s no shareholders to pay dividends to and no corporations who need a profitable balance sheet. Medicinal research projects can be owned and grown by general society. Then there’s the entire potential for NFTs to replace traditional patents.

Which brings us to,

Just imagine, any scientist in any field of study can distribute his research to anyone, anywhere with no fear of it being stolen. In fact, this is already happening. At the University of California, Berkeley, an auction was held for an NFT linked to documents related to the research of Nobel Prize-winning cancer researcher James Allison. They ended up auctioning the NFT for more than $50,000.

NFTs provide unprecedented protection when compared to traditional intellectual property protection methods. Plus, big inventions and discoveries can be turned into collectibles.

With all this talk about DeSci, it must be evident that most of its possibilities can only be enabled with DAOs. And there’s new DeSci DAOs emerging almost every week. Opscientia is curating a network of knowledge foundries, kind of like a library of libraries. PsyDao is furthering research into psychedelic medicine. LabDao is another community of dry and wet laboratories working to advance research in the life sciences.

DAOs are the foundation on which scientists, researchers and other interested stakeholders will collaborate. DAOs also provide an excellent platform to share knowledge, raise funding and prioritize research based on relevance rather than profit. Not to mention, a robust mechanism for governance.

It’s natural to get excited about DeSci and all that it can enable. DeFi did grow to $40 billion in just 2 years. However, DeFi participants did not wait for the blessings of the SEC, the Federal Reserve or the hundreds of other financial regulators in the world. DeSci needs the same, if not more momentum to grow. DeSci DAOs must not wait for the blessings of regulatory bodies like the FDA. They must instead, spearhead.

As things stand, DeSci lacks a clear set of shared values. Right now, DeSci DAOs are defining themselves by the problems they’re trying to solve (and not as a ‘DeSci DAO’). For a new scientific culture to emerge, the DeSci movement must homogenise.

There also needs to be governance systems in place, and the movement needs to establish common protocols and standard practices. Yes, that’s how new DeSci is. But despite the vagueness of it all, it’s exciting, revolutionary and has the potential to redefine how our society innovates.

Innovation happens when people collaborate. DAOs are already revolutionizing how we collaborate. And DeFi has already reaped the benefits of this unbarred collaboration. While DeSci calls for different protocols, we know it isn’t impossible because we’ve done it before. Right now, the movement is in desperate need of experienced, quality talent to increase collaboration. From doctors and pharmacists to philanthropists and entrepreneurs.

So if you’re one of them, or you know one of them, feel free to point them towards DeSci. It’s one of those rabbit holes that’s impossible to not dive into.