Laboratory safety and research productivity

Are laboratory safety practices a tax on scientific productivity? We examine this question by exploiting the substantial increase in safety regulations at the University of California following the shocking death of a research assistant in 2008. Difference-in-differences analyses show that relative to dry labsthat use theoretical and computational methods, the publication rates of wet labsthat conduct experiments using chemical and biological substances did not change significantly after the shock. At the same time, we find that wet labs that used dangerous compounds more frequently before the shock reduced their reliance on flammable materials and unfamiliar hazardous compounds afterward, even though their overall research agenda does not appear to be affected. Our findings suggest that laboratory safety may shape the production of science, but they do not support the claim that safety practices impose a significant tax on research productivity.

Automated summary

This study examines the impact of safety regulations on research productivity by analyzing the case of increased safety regulations at the University of California after a tragic accident in 2008. The results suggest that wet labs, which conduct experiments using chemical and biological substances, did not experience significant changes in publication rates after the accident. However, wet labs that frequently used dangerous compounds before the accident reduced their reliance on flammable materials and unfamiliar hazardous compounds afterward. These findings indicate that laboratory safety practices may shape scientific production, but they do not impose a significant tax on research productivity.