Programme Thesis
Emergent Ventures funds high-risk, high-reward moonshots and bold, transformative ideas that challenge conventional thinking, aiming to catalyze breakthroughs with large societal impact. It exists to support unconventional innovators who might be overlooked by traditional grant mechanisms, particularly those working on problems in economics, technology, and societal well-being.
Selection Criteria
- Boldness and novelty of the idea (high-risk, high-reward moonshot potential)
- Potential for transformative societal impact (scale and significance of the problem addressed)
- Applicant's demonstrated initiative, independence, and track record of execution (e.g., preprints, patents, platforms built)
- Clarity and persuasiveness of the narrative linking the idea to real-world change
- Credibility and endorsements from recognized experts in relevant fields
- Alignment with Emergent Ventures' focus on underfunded, unconventional approaches (often economics/tech, but open to other domains if framed as societal innovation)
Past Winners / Cohort Profiles
Past winners include a diverse mix of early-career researchers, independent inventors, and social entrepreneurs working on unconventional projects—e.g., a mathematician developing new economic models, a biologist creating open-source lab equipment, and a technologist building decentralized governance tools. Named examples are not listed on the page, but the archetype is a self-starter with a bold, scalable idea who has already built something tangible (prototype, preprint, platform) and can articulate a clear path to impact.
Ideal Candidate Fingerprint
The platonic ideal applicant is an independent, early-career innovator with a high-risk, high-reward idea that could disrupt a major field, backed by early evidence of feasibility (e.g., a working prototype, preprint, or patent). They have a compelling narrative connecting their work to a large societal problem, strong endorsements from established experts, and a track record of executing independently without institutional support.
Recommended Framing
Eniola should frame the CCT model as a high-risk, high-reward moonshot that could revolutionize addiction treatment—a global crisis costing trillions—by preventing reward-memory encoding. Emphasize the independent research path (sole-authored preprints, provisional patent, platforms built) as proof of bold, self-directed innovation, and leverage endorsements from Berridge, Gershman, Daw, and Mattar to signal credibility. The narrative should link neuropharmacology to societal well-being (reducing addiction's economic and human toll) to align with Emergent Ventures' focus on transformative impact beyond traditional academic silos.
Watch Out
None—Eniola's independent track record, preprints, patent, and endorsements mitigate the lack of a PhD or institutional affiliation. The only potential concern is the programme's typical emphasis on economics/tech, but the strong societal-impact framing for addiction should overcome this.