Autism research funding allocation: can economics tell us if we have got it right?

There is a concern that the allocation of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research funding may be misallocating resources, overemphasizing basic science at the expense of translational and clinical research. Anthony Bailey has proposed that an economic evaluation of autism research funding allocations could be beneficial for funding agencies by identifying under- or overfunded areas of research. In response to Bailey, we illustrate why economics cannot provide an objective, technical solution for identifying the "best" allocation of research resources. Economic evaluation has its greatest power as a late-stage research tool for interventions with identified objectives, outcomes, and data. This is not the case for evaluating whether research areas are over- or underfunded. Without an understanding of how research funding influences the likelihood and value of a discovery, or without a statement of the societal objectives for ASD research and level of risk aversion, economic analysis cannot provide a useful normative evaluation of ASD research.