In addressing a subcommittee of the National Science Board…

““In addressing a subcommittee of the National Science Board (it oversees the National Science Foundation) charged with reviewing “transformational” science, he remarked: My colleagues and I have studied approximately 175 research organizations on both sides of the Atlantic, and in many respects the Santa Fe Institute is the ideal type of organization which facilitates creative thinking. And here’s a quote from Wired magazine: Since its founding in 1984, the nonprofit research center has united top minds from diverse fields to study cellular biology, computer networks, and other systems that underlie our lives. The patterns they’ve discovered have illuminated some of the most pressing issues of our time and, along the way, served as the basis for what’s now called the science of complexity. The institute was originally conceived by a small group of distinguished scientists, including several Nobel laureates, most of whom had some association with Los Alamos National Laboratory. They were concerned that the academic landscape had become so dominated by disciplinary stovepiping and specialization that many of the big questions, and especially those that transcend disciplines or were perhaps of a societal nature, were being ignored. The reward system for obtaining an academic position, for gaining promotion or tenure, for securing grants from federal agencies or private foundations, and even for being elected to a national academy, was becoming more and more tied to demonstrating that you were the expert in some tiny corner of some narrow subdiscipline. The freedom to think or speculate about some of the bigger questions and broader issues, to take a risk or be a maverick, was not a luxury many could afford. It was not just “publish or perish,” but increasingly it was also becoming “bring in the big bucks or perish.””

— Geoffrey West