Breaking Down Walls Between Basic and Applied Research

Questions about the very nature of scientific discovery are being raised by Belfer Center experts Venkatesh “Venky” Narayanamurti, Tolu Odumosu, and Lee Vinsel.

Their new discussion paper, entitled “The Discovery-Invention Cycle: Bridging the Basic/Applied Dichotomy,” describes the longstanding paradigm that separates basic research and discovery from applied research and implementation—for example, separating the study of the DNA of a bacteria from the application of that knowledge to develop new drugs and compounds.

The authors make the case that both scientific discovery and technological deployment would be better off without a virtual wall. As they write in “Issues in Science and Technology,” “The switch from a basic/applied nomenclature to discovery-invention is not a mere semantic refinement. It enables us to see the entire research enterprise in a new way.”

“This fresh view of the research enterprise can lead us to rethinking the design of research institutions to align with the principles of long timeframes, a premium on futuristic ideas, and the encouragement of interaction among different elements of the research ecosystem.”

It is the hope of the authors that such a change can reinvigorate government-led scientific endeavors, particularly in long-range fields like energy and medicine.

(See http://belfercenter.org/Discovery/Invention)