Who Decides Funding in a Science DAO?

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

In a science DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization), funding decisions are made collectively — but the exact mechanism depends on the DAO’s governance design. Unlike traditional grant systems controlled by agencies or university committees, science DAOs rely on token-based governance, on-chain voting, and community review ⚙️

---

Governance Token Holders

In most science DAOs, governance token holders decide how funds are allocated.

• Each token typically equals one vote
• Proposals are submitted on-chain
• Token holders vote to approve or reject funding

This model is common in blockchain-native organizations like VitaDAO and Molecule.

How It Works

1. Researcher submits a proposal.
2. Community discussion occurs (forum + Discord).
3. Token holders vote.
4. Smart contracts release funds automatically if approved.

This creates transparency and auditability 🔍

---

Delegated Governance

Some science DAOs use delegated voting (similar to representative democracy).

• Token holders delegate voting power to trusted experts.
• Domain specialists review technical proposals.
• Final decisions are executed on-chain.

This improves decision quality in complex fields like biotech or AI research.

---

Scientific Review Committees

Many science DAOs integrate peer-review-like layers:

• Expert panels screen proposals before public vote.
• Review scores may influence funding weight.
• Reputation systems track reviewer performance.

This hybrid approach combines Web3 governance with traditional scientific rigor.

---

Quadratic or Retroactive Funding

Certain DAOs experiment with advanced funding mechanisms:

• Quadratic voting: reduces whale dominance.
• Retroactive public goods funding: rewards projects after measurable impact.

For example, Gitcoin pioneered quadratic funding models later adapted in scientific ecosystems.

---

Treasury Structure

Funding ultimately comes from a DAO treasury:

• Token sales
• NFT/IP licensing
• Donations
• Protocol revenue

The treasury is controlled by smart contracts, not individuals.

---

Key Difference from Traditional Funding

Traditional Grants	Science DAO
Closed committees	Open token voting
Opaque decisions	On-chain transparency
Institutional gatekeeping	Permissionless participation
Multi-year review cycles	Rapid proposal cycles

---

Conclusion

Funding in a science DAO is decided by its governance structure, usually:

• Token holders
• Delegated experts
• Hybrid peer-review systems

The defining feature is programmable transparency — rules are encoded in smart contracts, and decisions are publicly verifiable on-chain.

In short: funding power shifts from institutions to network participants 🌐

👉 But in AI Internet-Meritocracy app funding is decided by an impartial AI for maximum funding efficiency and fairness. Human voting is however used to prevent scams such as prompt injection. Donate.