Journal Article - Issues in Science and Technology

RIP: The Basic/Applied Research Dichotomy

| Winter 2013

Terminology that does not reflect the rich connectivity and interaction of many types of research is a barrier to developing policies built on the realities of science and technology.

U.S. science policy since World War II has in large measure been driven by Vannevar Bush's famous paper Science—The Endless Frontier. Bush's separation of research into "basic" and "applied" domains has been enshrined in much of U.S. science and technology policy over the past seven decades, and this false dichotomy has become a barrier to the development of a coherent national innovation policy. Much of the debate centers on the appropriate federal role in innovation. Bush argued successfully that funding basic research was a necessary role for government, with the implication that applied research should be left to the auspices of markets. However, the original distinction does not reflect what actually happens in research, and its narrow focus on the stated goals of an individual research project prevents us from taking a more productive holistic view of the research enterprise....

Continue reading: http://www.issues.org/29.2/Venkatesh.html

For more information on this publication: Please contact Science, Technology, and Public Policy
For Academic Citation: Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, Tolu Odumosu, and Lee Vinsel. RIP: The Basic/Applied Research Dichotomy.” Issues in Science and Technology, vol. XXIX. no. 2. (Winter 2013) .

The Authors