The Minerva Consortium

[Randy Brown]

I find myself in a rather odd position here; I am primarily a theoretician who does an incredible amount of applied work. If we use the physical sciences as a model, I would think that the best avenue to take would be some fairly wide open basic research. I think that limitations to studies of governance issues or community building is a major mistake ...

My apologies! My example of "community planning" was a ham-handed attempt to juxtapose an example of a concrete/applied something with a presumedly more abstract something-else. On the civilian side, my graduate work was an interdisciplinary mix between Community and Regional Planning (CRP) and Architecture--the applications of cultural landscape (political, geographic, historical, economic) to nuts-and-bolts problems like designing a structure, organizing citizens, or writing a municipal code. I hope that helps explain where I was coming from--and where I was trying to go.

One of the things I would like to see would be a bonus for multi- / inter-disciplinary proposals that incorporate both theoretical and applied research from many different disciplines.

I realize this isn't want you meant by "bonusing," but your comment caused me to wonder about the possibilities inherent in a Nobel Prize or X-Prize incentive. Would an annual Minerva Prize have any merit? (A virgin-warrior statue of some sort would seem to be the most likely physical presentation ...)

Also, I'm loathe to suggest a Minerva Journal, but wouldn't it also follow that the consortium would create/encourage opportunities for peer-reviewed publication?