CRISPR/Cas has the potential to revolutionize medicine, agriculture, and the way we understand life itself . Understanding the trajectory of innovation, how it is influenced and who pays for it, is essential for such a transformative technology. The University of California and the Broad/Harvard/MIT systems are the two most prominent academic institutions involved in the researchand development of CRISPR/Cas. Here we present a model of co-funding networks  for CRISPR/Cas research at these institutions, using funding acknowledgments to build connections. We map papers representing 95\% of citations on CRISPR / Cas from these institutions grouped by the stage that each represents in the translational research process (as a biological phenomenon, as a research tool, and development and applications of these technologies), and use a novel technique to analyse the relationships between the structures of the co-funding networks, the phase of research, and funding sources. The co-funding subnetworks were similar in that US government research funding played the decisive role in early stage research. Research at Broad/Harvard/MIT is also strongly supported by URLanizations in later stages of the translational research process, clustered around certain topics. Applications for CRISPR technologies were underrepresented, which bolsters findings on the preponderance of the US private sector in developing applications, and the disproportionate number of Chinese institutions filing patents for industrial and food systems applications. These network models raise fundamental questions about the role of the state in supporting breakthrough innovations, risk, reward, and the influence of the private sector and philanthropy over the trajectory of transformative technologies.
CRISPR/Cas has the potential to revolutionize medicine, agriculture, and biology . Understanding the trajectory of innovation, how it is influenced and who pays for it, is an essential research policy question, especially as US government support for research experiences a relative decline. We use a new method -- based on funding sources identified in publications' funding acknowledgements -- to map the networks involved in supporting key stages of highly influential research, namely basic biological research and technology development. We present a model of co-funding networks at the two most prominent institutions for CRISPR/Cas research , the University of California and the Harvard / MIT/Broad Institute, to illuminate how philanthropic and URLanizations have articulated with US government agencies to co-finance the discovery and development of CRISPR/Cas. We mapped foundational US government support to both stages of CRISPR/Cas research at both institutions, while URLanizations have concentrated in co-funding CRISPR/Cas technology development as opposed to basic biological research. This is particularly true for the Broad/Harvard/MIT system, where philanthropic investment clustered around particular technological development themes. These network models raise fundamental questions about the role of the state and the influence of philanthropy over the trajectory of transformative technologies.
R
the way we understand life itself
biology
R
essential for such a transformative technology. The University of California and the Broad/Harvard/MIT systems are the two most prominent academic institutions involved in the researchand development of CRISPR/Cas. Here we
an essential research policy question, especially as US government support for research experiences a relative decline. We use a new method -- based on funding sources identified in publications' funding acknowledgements -- to map the networks involved in supporting key stages of highly influential research, namely basic biological research and technology development. We
A
at the two most prominent institutions
R
at these institutions, using funding acknowledgments to build connections. We map papers representing 95\% of citations on CRISPR
, the University of California and the Harvard
R
Cas from these institutions grouped by the stage that each represents in the translational research process (as a biological phenomenon, as a research tool, and development and applications of these technologies), and use a novel technique to analyse the relationships between the structures of the
MIT/Broad Institute, to illuminate how philanthropic and URLanizations have articulated with US government agencies to co-finance the discovery and development of CRISPR/Cas. We mapped foundational US government support to both stages of CRISPR/Cas research at both institutions, while URLanizations have concentrated in
R
networks, the phase of research, and funding sources. The co-funding subnetworks were similar in that US government research funding played the decisive role in early stage research. Research at
CRISPR/Cas technology development as opposed to basic biological research. This is particularly true for the
R
is also strongly supported by URLanizations in later stages of the translational research process, clustered around certain topics. Applications for CRISPR technologies were underrepresented, which bolsters findings on the preponderance of the US private sector in developing applications, and the disproportionate number of Chinese institutions filing patents for industrial and food systems applications.
system, where philanthropic investment clustered around particular technological development themes.
D
in supporting breakthrough innovations, risk, reward,
D
the private sector and