Sam Moore, in a [LSE Impact post on research and the commons](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/12/17/look-to-the-commons-for-the-future-of-rd-and-science-policy/):
> Simply put, policymakers should reorient their focus away from mere open access to the outputs of scientific research and instead nurture the commons across the research lifecycle. It would mean less of a winner-takes-all strategy to research funding – away from huge grants dictated by bogus ideas of [‘excellence’](https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms2016105) – and more of one that encourages small, careful, collaborative research by and between diverse groups of scientists. This could be facilitated through basic research income, grant lotteries and other non-competitive methods, with the outputs from each grant owned in common by scientists across the globe.
The idea of a basic research income (presumably analogized from basic income schemes)—paired with a grant lottery, for example—is a mind-bending departure from the conventional reward systems that (in theory) link distinction with funding. Moore elevates cooperative knowledge-*making* over the norm of universal *access*—"communism" in [Merton's original, perhaps infelicitous term](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mertonian_norms).