Year: 1999
Type: article
Abstract: It seems odd in one respect to mention science in connection with a territory, since we think of the results of science as being universal and having no nationality.Indeed when we talk of British science or French science we are not talking of the content of scientific knowledge, but about individuals and institutions and their contributions to the body of scientific knowledge.We can have a national pride and loyalty in them in the same way that we have for a football team or a tennis champion.In this way the Germans can be proud of Leibnitz as a German scientist, and the Italians of Galileo as an Italian scientist; it is pure chauvinism.However, these days it does not stop there but carries over into the funding of research.Tables are published of the percentage of GNP that each nation spends on research (incidentally, by no means a straightforward calculation since it depends on how you define research and how you attribute the costs) and governments are urged to enter into a race with the leaders.The arguments used are nearly always based on the proposal that research feeds industry and hence, by increasing funding for scientific research, you are ipso facto creating prosperity and increasing the GNP -a virtuous circle.Since so much of modern industry is directly connected with scientific advance, one can only applaud when this argument has influence on those who control the provision of funds But you will say that not all research is of immediate value to industry, so we must divide it into pure research, undertaken out of curiosity about the world, and applied research that has immediate effects on industry.This division causes a great deal of trouble.Most modern industry is based on research that started out as quite pure.As industry has become increasingly science based, the interval between the basic discovery and its application has become very short and has also shifted the location where the basic science is carried out; a surprising amount of basic research is now carried out in industry itself.There needs to be a good balance between basic research and the application technology and just where to strike the balance leads to much argument and politicking in our nations.It has also led to the ridiculous and rather absurd requirement of some funding bodies to have indications from applicants of the likely economic spin-off of the work they propose to do.Let us now turn to European science; why bother, isn't it just the sum of the research done in whatever we call Europe at any moment?Of course it is, but it is not so simple as that.We are all aware that, after 1945, science in the United States came to dominate world science (note: the 1998 Nobel Prizes in science and medicine, 100% American!) and makes a much greater contribution than any single European country, so there is a way in which pride requires that we sum up science in Europe and see how this sum compares.It is also highly desirable that the different actors in European science should know what each is doing, and for this
Source: European Review
Author: Arnold Burgen
Language: English
Subfield: Information Systems and Management
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W4236545063