Christoph Ströck on
Twitter |
XCancel:
The DACH region [Germany, Austria, Switzerland] is becoming one of the main centers of gravity for ME/CFS research.
Given Germany’s funding trajectory, institutional funding there is already surpassing that of the US and UK.
How much of that ultimately translates into meaningful scientific output remains to be seen.
Germany will inevitably dominate the region simply because of its size and resources.
Austria, however, is on a strong trajectory of its own, with advantages in some areas and constraints in others.
Switzerland is still lagging behind, but I am confident it will follow.
Ideally, Swiss structures can learn from what has worked, and what has worked less well, in Germany and Austria rather than repeating the same learning curve.
Institutional and private funding follow different incentives.
Institutional money has to satisfy many constituencies, regional interests and constraints.
Private funding should hedge against some of those incentives by making different bets, especially where concentration, cross-border coordination make sense.
This matters particularly for infrastructure. Most of it will be institutionally funded, but private capital and expertise can help connect and scale (and hopefully in some cases hinder/redirect) it across DACH instead of building several small versions of the same thing.
While basic, translational and clinical research depends on that infrastructure, the optimization logic for these domains is somewhat different: it's important to cooperate closely while diversifying hypotheses, and approaches.
There is no such thing as an optimal strategy.
You cannot truly optimize for something you understand so incompletely.
But there are probably better and worse ways to optimize: use different funding mechanisms, incentives, portfolios and local strengths to complement and hedge against one another are some of the tools.
Another opportunity is to pool more private funding across the region for international research allocation.
This is where we already have a very strong allocation process at WE&ME, through the strong S4ME and WWTF partnership.
I increasingly think most of my resources, and much more importantly of course WE&ME’s, should go towards strategy optimization: helping shape that broader strategy in the region rather than predominantly funding individual small-scale studies.
Those studies and early investments remain absolutely necessary, but we need a better mix, with more resources going toward strategy and coordination.
Of course, our contribution is still a drop in the ocean, but I think this is where our resources can have the greatest leverage.
Globally speaking, DACH cannot substitute for much greater investment in the US and especially China.
