That appears to be one of the suggestions for how to encourage more risky research in a recent article in Physics World (H/T Scientific Blogging). Risky in this case is meant to be different, unique, cutting-edge, not high potential for harm or damage. This is another effort to address a perennial research management question – how do you encourage enough of this kind of risky research in order to keep getting the kind of radical breakthroughs that push science and technology along. Science is an inherently conservative (small-c) process, as it requires the agreement of the community to establish its information. Those who take risks and fail lose a lot, as tenure committees, journal boards, and funding organizations don’t deal well with ‘failed’ experiments.