Reforming Academic Incentives

What are you trying to do?We want to create reliable ex-post measures of prestige. A long-term prediction market could be set up today to measure a consensus of experts (to be chosen one hundred years in the future) about what current research most impacted valued outcomes.How is it done today? What are the limitations of the current system?Current prestige is measured by journal publication, job title, citations, and grants. Prestige is constructed in and informal/social way. Having prestige doesn’t equate to having scientific insight.What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?A long-term prediction market would separate the living human career concerns from the ultimate value of the science. It is more worth trying than known to work.If successful, what difference will it make?Academia/science would make more/better useful intellectual progress. Broader public may begin talking about this market, thus showing interest in what science research is effective.Cost and Timeline?Expert analysis may need 6 profs for 6 years: $5m; then use $100m to pick 10 people on the basis of these market.What are the mid-term and final exams to check for completeness?Mid-term exams:Is there prediction market activity?Can we find a way to rate past progress?Final exams:Is the prediction market still in operation?Is academic world influenced by prices?