More or more creative researchers?
While research innovation and research impact are not the same, the similarities in the analyses discussed above indicate a strong connection between the two. The reason for their shared decline is less evident. Economist Daniel Susskind speculates that research may be getting harder because we have now picked all the “low-hanging fruit” (Growth – A Reckoning, Allen Lane 2024). For Susskind, this means we should redouble our efforts, getting even more researchers on the job while slimming down “academic bureaucracies.” The evidence discussed above suggests that simply increasing the number of researchers does not lead to more innovative or economically viable work, although it is important to remember that the value of research is not necessarily connected to its capacity to drive material prosperity. Perhaps what is required is not more researchers, but researchers who are better equipped to see patterns and connections that might otherwise be missed?
Can AI tools drive disruptive thinking?
A more subtle take on the systemic issue is that the modern research ecosystem may be favoring small, safe bets over risky, expensive blue-sky thinking, a point raised by Elsevier’s Adrian Raudaschl, product manager for LeapSpace, in a recent interview. Whatever your stance on the research innovation debate, the potential of AI tools to drive more disruptive thinking is an intriguing new development. While these tools can speed up repetitive tasks and give researchers more time to think creatively, they can also contribute by supporting a far broader frame of reference. To address this need, LeapSpace has been designed to let users explore across the full range of disciplines, providing accessible entry points and allowing them to make connections that might otherwise go unnoticed. Rather than simply providing summaries of abstracts, LeapSpace proactively suggests unexpected or unconventional angles, potentially providing novel lines of inquiry.
This type of approach is particularly well-suited for areas like rare disease research, which can be constrained by the structural barriers discussed above.In the words of Cara O’Neill, Chief Science Officer, Cure Sanfilippo Foundation: “Rare disease research is limited by the small number of experts focused on each disease, Sanfilippo syndrome being no exception. We rely on connections and learnings across multiple disciplines to bridge gaps in direct evidence. Synthesizing vast amounts of often disparate information is a challenge. In my early experience with LeapSpace, I’ve been impressed with how it’s able to address these challenges while providing confidence in the accuracy and rigor of its outputs.”
This ability to bridge disciplines and make new connections is critical at a time when governments and funders, eager to see “real-world impact,” are driving a shift toward more mission-driven research (e.g., tackling grand challenges like curing cancer), a trend noted by 67% of the respondents to the survey underpinning Elsevier’s Researcher of the Future report. In Europe and the US, a parallel trend towards reduced researcher mobility, noted by the same report, and curtailed international collaboration opportunities – the result of rising geopolitical tensions – may also strengthen the case for expansive AI tools.
More novel and ambitious research
While LeapSpace may well accelerate the workflows of its users, the goal is not to create more research, but more novel and ambitious research. The mechanisms via which research ideas confer social or economic benefits are still underexplored, but the capacity of AI tools to help generate ideas that foster growth – in the way defined by Romer and others – raises a tantalizing prospect for research leaders, eager to demonstrate the impact of their institutions. AI is reshaping academia and society – redefining work, changing social structures and raising important questions about ethics, bias and accountability – but one of its most enduring impacts may yet be the rejuvenation of the research enterprise and its reconnection to economic strategies as a recognized engine of development.
