sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cloud chamber, Discovery (observation), Mechanism (engineering), Research and development

The relationship between and

Harvey Brooks John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Universily, 79 J.F.K. Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

Science, technology and each represent a suc- 1. Introduction cessively larger category of activities which are highly interde- pendent but distinct. Science contributes to technology in at least six ways: (1) new knowledge which serves as a direct Much public debate about science and tech- source of ideas for new technological possibilities; (2) source nology policy has been implicitly dominated by a of tools and techniques for more efficient design ‘pipeline’ model of the innovation process in and a knowledge base for evaluation of feasibility of designs; (3) instrumentation, techniques and ana- which new technological ideas emerge as a result lytical methods used in research that eventually find their way of new discoveries in science and move through a into design or industrial practices, often through intermediate progression from applied research, design, manu- disciplines; (4) practice of research as a source for develop- facturing and, finally, and ment and assimilation of new human skills and capabilities . This model seemed to correspond with eventually useful for technology; (5) creation of a knowledge base that becomes increasingly important in the assessment of some of the most visible success stories of World technology in terms of its wider social and environmental War II, such as the atomic bomb, radar, and the impacts; (6) knowledge base that enables more efficient proximity fuze, and appeared to be further exem- strategies of applied research, development, and refinement plified by developments such as the transistor, of new . the laser, the computer, and, most recently, the The converse impact of technology on science is of at least equal importance: (1) through providing a fertile source of nascent arising out of the novel scientific questions and thereby also helping to justify discovery of recombinant DNA techniques. The the allocation of resources needed to address these questions model was also, perhaps inadvertently, legiti- in an efficient and timely manner, extending the agenda of mated by the influential Bush report, Science, the science; (2) as a source of otherwise unavailable instrumenta- Endless Frontier, which over time came to be tion and techniques needed to address novel and more diffi- cult scientific questions more efficiently. interpreted as saying that if the nation supported Specific examples of each of these two-way interactions scientists to carry out research according to their are discussed. Because of many indirect as well as direct own of what was important and interesting, connections between science and technology, the research technologies useful to health, national security, portfolio of potential social benefit is much broader and more and the economy would follow almost automati- diverse than would be suggested by looking only at the direct connections between science and technology. cally once the potential opportunities opened up by new scientific discoveries became widely known to the military, the health professions, and the private entrepreneurs operating in the national economy. (See United States Office of Scientific Correspondence to: H. Brooks, John F. Kennedy School of Research and Development (1945) for a recent Government, Harvard University, 79 J.F.K. Street, - account of the political context and general intel- bridge, MA 02138, USA. Tel., (617) 495-1445; fax, (617) lectual climate in which this report originated; 495-5776. see also Frederickson, 1993.) The body of re- Research Policy 23 (1994) 477-486 search knowledge was thought of as a kind of North-Holland intellectual bank account on which society as a

0048-7333/94/$07.00 0 1994 - Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved SSDI 0048-7333(94)01001-S 478 H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technoluRy whole would be abte to draw almost automati- new to them, whether or not they are new to the caliy as required to fulfil its aspirations and needs. universe, or even to the nation.” The current US Though most knowledgeable people under- mental model of innovation often places excessive stood that such a model corresponded only to the emphasis on originality in the sense of newness to rare and exceptional cases cited above, it became the universe as opposed to newness in context. In embodied in political rhetoric and took consider- general, the activities and investments associated able hold on the public imagination and seemed with ‘technoIogica1 leadership’ in the sense of to be confirmed by a sufficient number of dra- absolute originali~ differ much less than is gen- matic anecdotes so that it was regarded as typical erally assumed from those associated with simply of the entire process of technological innovation, staying near the forefront of best national or though it was severely criticized by many scholars. world practice. Yet R&D is also necessary for (See Kline and Rosenberg (1986) for an example learning about technology even when it is not of criticism and an excellent discussion of a more ‘new to the universe’ but only in the particular realistic and typical model.) One consequence context in which it is being used for the first time was considerable confusion in the public mind (Brooks, 1991, pp. 20-25). between science and engineering, an excessive However, innovation involves much more than preoccupation with technical originality and pri- R&D. Charpie (1967) has provided a representa- ority of conception as not only necessary but tive allocation of effort that goes into the intro- sufficient conditions for successful technological duction of a new product, as follows: innovation, and in fact an equating of organized (a) conception, primarily knowledge genera- research and development (R&D) with the inno- tion (research, advanced development, basic in- vation process itself. The ratio of national R&D vention) 5-10%; expenditures to gross domestic product (GDP) (b) product design and engineering, lo-20%; often became a surrogate measure of national cc> getting ready for (lay-out, technological performance and, uItimately, of tooling, process design), 40-60%; long-term national economic potential. The con- (d) manufacturing start-up, debugging produc- tent of R&D was treated as a ‘black box’ that tion, 5-15%; yielded benefits almost independently of what (e) marketing start-up, probing the market, was inside it (Brooks, 1993, pp. 30-31). lo-20%. The public may be forgiven its confusions, as It does not follow from this that R&D or indeed the relationships between science and knowledge generation is only 5-10% of total in- technology are very complex, though interactive, novative activity because many projects are started and are often different in different fields and at that never get beyond stage (a) and an even different phases of a technological ‘life cycle’. smaller proportion of projects are carried all the Nelson (1992) has given a definition of technology way through stage (e). In addition, there is a both as “ . . , specific designs and practices” and as certain amount of background research that is “generic knowledge.. . that provides understand- carried out on a level-of-effort basis without any ing of how [and why] things work.. . ” and what specific product in mind. There is no very good are the most promising approaches to further estimate of what percentage of the innovative advances, including “. . . the nature of currently activity of a particular firm would be classified in binding constraints.” It is important here to note category (a) if unsuccessful projects or back- that technoiogy is not just things, but also embod- ground research are taken into account. The fact ies a degree of generic understanding, which remains that all five stages involve a certain pro- makes it seem more like science, and yet it is portion of technical work which is not classified understanding that relates to a specific artifact, as R&D, and the collection of statistical data on which distinguishes it from normal scientific un- this portion of ‘downstream’ innovative activity is derstanding, although there may be a close corre- in a very rudimentary state compared with that spondence. for organized R&D. Indeed, only about 35% of Similarly, Nelson (1992, p. 349) defines innova- scientists and in the US are employed tion as “ . . . the processes by which firms master in R&D. and get into practice product designs that are In small firms, especially technological ‘niche’ H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology 479 firms whose is based on a cluster of ery of uranium fission leading to the concept of a specialized technologies which are often designed nuclear chain reaction and the atomic bomb and in close collaboration with potential users, there nuclear power is, perhaps, the cleanest example is a good deal of technical activity by highly of this. Other examples include the laser and its trained people which is never captured in the numerous embodiments and applications, the dis- usual R&D statistics. coveries of X-rays and of artificial radioactivity Thus, science, technology, and innovation each and their subsequent applications in medicine represent a successively larger universe of activi- and industry, the discovery of nuclear magnetic ties which are highly interdependent, yet never- resonance (NMR) and its subsequent manifold theless distinct from each other. Even success in applications in chemical analysis, biomedical re- technology by itself, let alone science, provides an search, and ultimately medical diagnosis, and insufficient basis for success in the whole process maser amplifiers and their applications in ra- of technological innovation. In fact, the relation dioastronomy and . These do ex- between science and technology is better thought emplify most of the features of the pipeline model of in terms of two parallel streams of cumulative of innovation described above. Yet, they are the knowledge, which have many interdependencies rarest, but therefore also the most dramatic cases, and cross relations, but whose internal connec- which may account for the persistence of the tions are much stronger than their cross connec- pipeline model of public discussions. It also suits tions. The metaphor I like to use is two strands of the purpose of basic scientists arguing for govern- DNA which can exist independently, but cannot ment support of their research in a pragmatically be truly functional until they are paired. oriented culture. A more common example of a direct genetic relationship between science and technology oc- 2. The contributions of science to technology curs when the exploration of a new field of sci- ence is deliberately undertaken with a general The relations between science and technology anticipation that it has a high likelihood of lead- are complex and vary considerably with the par- ing to useful applications, though there is no ticular field of technology being discussed. For specific end-product in mind. The work at Bell mechanical technology, for example, the contri- Telephone and elsewhere which led bution of science to technology is relatively weak, eventually to the of the transistor is one and it is often possible to make rather important of the clearest examples of this. The group that without a deep knowledge of the un- was set up at Bell Labs to explore the physics of derlying science. By contrast, electrical, chemical, Group IV semiconductors such as germanium and nuclear technology are deeply dependent on was clearly motivated by the hope of finding a science, and most inventions are made only by method of making a solid state amplifier to sub- people with considerable training in science. In stitute for the use of vacuum tubes in repeaters the following discussion, we outline the variety of for the transmission of telephone signals over ways in which science can contribute to techno- long distances. logical development. The complexity of the inter- As indicated above, much so-called basic re- connections of science and technology is further search undertaken by industry or supported by discussed in Nelson and Rosenberg (1993). the military services has been undertaken with this kind of non-specific potential applicability in 2.1. Science as a direct source of new technological mind, and indeed much basic biomedical research ideas is of this character. The selection of fields for emphasis is a ‘strategic’ decision, while the actual In this case, opportunities for meeting new day-to-day ‘tactics’ of the research are delegated social needs or previously identified social needs to the ‘bench scientists’. Broad industrial and in new ways are conceived as a direct sequel to a government support for condensed matter physics scientific discovery made in the course of an and atomic and molecular physics since World exploration of natural phenomena undertaken War II has been motivated by the well-substanti- with no potential application in mind. The discov- ated expectation that it would lead to important 480 H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology new applications in electronics, communications, 3.3. Instrumentation, laboratory techniques, and and computers. The determination of an appro- analytical methods priate level of effort, and the creation of an organizational environment that will facilitate the Laboratory techniques or analytical methods earliest possible identification of technological used in , particularly in physics, opportunities without too much constraint on the often find their way either directly, or indirectly research agenda is a continuing challenge to re- via other disciplines, into and search planning in respect to this particular process controls largely unrelated either to their mechanism of science-technology interaction. original use or to the concepts and results of the research for which they were originally devised 2.2. Science as a source of engineering design tools (Rosenberg, 1991). According to Rosenberg and techniques (19911, “this involves the movement of new in- strumentation technologies.. . from the status of While the process of design is quite distinct a tool of basic research, often in universities, to from the process of developing new knowledge of the status of a production tool, or capital good, in natural phenomena, the two processes are very private industry.” Examples are legion and in- intimately related. This relationship has become clude diffraction, the scanning electron more and more important as the cost of empiri- (SEMI, implantation, synchrotron cally testing and evaluating complex prototype sources, phase-shifted lithography, high technological systems has mounted. Theoretical vacuum technology, industrial cryogenics, super- prediction, modeling, and simulation of large sys- conducting magnets (originally developed for tems, often accompanied by measurement and cloud chamber observations in particle physics, empirical testing of subsystems and components, then commercialized for ‘magnetic resonance has increasingly substituted for full scale empiri- imaging’ (MRI) in medicine). In Rosenberg’s cal testing of complete systems, and this requires words, “the common denominator running design tools and analytical methods grounded in through and connecting all these experiences is phenomenological understanding. This is particu- that instrumentation that was developed in the larly important for anticipating failure modes un- pursuit of scientific knowledge eventually had der extreme but conceivable conditions of service direct applications as part of a manufacturing of complex technological systems. (See Alit et al., process.” Also, in considering the potential eco- 1992, Chapter 4). For a discussion of technical nomic benefits of science, as Rosenberg says, knowledge underlying the engineering design “there is no obvious reason for failing to examine process, cf. Chapter 2 (pp. 39-341.) the hardware consequences of even the most Much of the technical knowledge used in de- fundamental scientific research.” One can also sign and the comparative analytical evaluation of envision ultimate industrial process applications alternative designs is actually developed as ‘en- from many other techniques now restricted to the gineering science’ by engineers, and is in fact the research laboratory. One example might be tech- major activity comprising engineering research in niques for creating selective chemical reactions academic engineering departments. This research using molecular beams. is very much in the style of other basic research in the ‘pure’ and is supported in a similar manner by the Engineering Division of the Na- 2.4. The development of human skills tional Science Foundation, i.e. as unsolicited, in- vestigator-originated project research. Even An important function of academic research though it is generally labelled as ‘engineering’ often neglected in estimating its economic bene- rather than ‘science’, such research is really an- fits is that it imparts research skills to graduate other example of basic research whose agenda students and other advanced trainees, many of happens to be motivated primarily by potential whom “go on to work in applied activities and applications in design ‘downstream’ though its take with them not just the knowledge resulting theoretical interest and its mathematical sophisti- from their research, but also the skills, methods, cation are comparable with that of pure science. and a web of professional contacts that will help H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology 481 them tackle the technological problems that they that only 2.5% of the scientists surveyed had later face.” (See Rosenberg (1990) and Pavitt received their Ph.D. training in solid state physics; (19911.) This is especially important in light of the 19% were chemists, and 73% had received their fact that basic research instrumentation so often doctorates in physics fields other than solid state, later finds application not only in engineering with predominating (Brooks, and other more applied disciplines such as clini- 1985). In fact, the shift of physics graduate study cal medicine, but also ultimately in routine indus- into solid state and condensed matter physics trial processes and operations, health care deliv- (about 40% of all physics Ph.D.s by the early ery, and environmental monitoring. 1970s) occurred after many of the fundamental A study based on a ranking by 6.50 industrial inventions had already been made. The skills research executives in 130 industries of the rele- acquired in graduate training in nuclear physics vance of a number of academic scientific disci- had been readily turned to the development and plines to technology in their industry, first, on the improvement of solid state devices (Brooks, 1978). basis of their skill base and, second, on the basis of their research results, showed strikingly higher ratings for the skill base from most disciplines 2.5. Technology assessment than from the actual research results. In the most extreme case, 44 industries rated physics high in The past two decades have witnessed an enor- skill base (second only to materials science, com- mous growth of interest and concern with predict- puter science, metallurgy and chemistry, in that ing and controlling the social impact of technol- order), whereas physics was almost at the bottom ogy, both anticipating new technologies and their of the list in respect to the direct contribution of social and environment implications and the con- academic research results to industrial applica- sequences of ever-increasing scale of application tions. Only in biology and medical science were of older technologies (Brooks, 1973). In general, the contributions of skill base and research re- the assessment of technology, whether for evalu- sults comparable (Nelson and Levin, 1986; Pavitt, ating its feasibility to assess entrepreneurial risk, 1991, p. 114 (Table 1)). The conclusion was “that or for foreseeing its societal side-effects, requires most scientific fields are much more strategically a deeper and more fundamental scientific under- important to technology than data on direct standing of the basis of the technology than does transfers of knowledge would lead us to believe” its original creation, which can often be carried (Pavitt, 1991). From these data, Pavitt inferred out by empirical trial-and-error methods. Fur- that “policies for greater selectivity and concen- ther, such understanding often requires basic sci- tration in the support of scientific fields have entific knowledge well outside the scope of what probably been misconceived”, for the contribu- was clearly relevant in the development of the tion of various disciplines to the development of technology. For example, the manufacture of a potentially useful skills appears to be much more new chemical may involve disposal of wastes broadly distributed among fields than are their which require knowledge of the groundwater hy- practically relevant research contributions. A part drology of the manufacturing site. Thus, as the of the problem here is, of course, that this con- deployment of technology becomes more exten- clusion is contrary to much of the rhetoric used in sive, and the technology itself becomes more advocating the support of basic research by gov- complex, one may anticipate the need for much ernments. more basic research knowledge relative to the As a further example of the importance of the technical knowledge required for original devel- widely usable generalized skills derived from par- opment. This has sometimes been called ‘defen- ticipation in any challenging field of research, the sive research’ and, it can be shown that, over National Research Council in 1964 surveyed time, the volume of research that can be de- about 1900 doctoral scientists working in industry scribed as defensive has steadily increased rela- in solid state physics and electronics. By that tive to the research that can be described as date, most of the basic ideas underlying the most ‘offensive’ - i.e. aimed at turning up new techno- important advances in solid state electronics had logical opportunities. This has led me to call already been developed. It was found, however, science the ‘conscience’ of technology. 482 H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology

2.6. Science as a source of development strategy ful in the fields of materials science and con- densed matter physics (Materials Advisory Board, Somewhat similarly to the case of technology 1966). In fact, materials science was created as a assessment, the planning of the most efficient new interdisciplinary field of academic research strategy of technological development, once gen- initially as an outgrowth of an effort to under- eral objectives have been set, is often quite de- stand some of the materials processes and prop- pendent on science from many fields. This accu- erties that were important to improving the qual- mulated stock of existing scientific (and techno- ity and performance of semiconductor devices. logical) knowledge helps to avoid blind alleys and One of the most dramatic examples of the hence wasteful development expenditures. Much generation of a stimulus to a new field of basic of this is, of course, old knowledge, rather than research by a discovery made in the course of a the latest research results, but it is nonetheless technology-motivated investigation was the dis- important and requires people who know the covery and quantitative measurement by a Bell field of relevant background science. One piece Laboratories group in 1965 of the background of evidence of this is the observation that very microwave radiation in space left over from the creative engineers and inventors tend to read original ‘big bang’, for which Penzias et al. ulti- very widely and eclectically both in the history of mately received the Nobel prize. A brief account science and technology, and about contemporary of the development of this subfield of cosmology scientific developments. is given in Physics Survey Committee (1972b). Other examples are tunneling in semiconductors (Suits and Bueche, 1967, pp. 304-3061, the pur- 3. Contribution of technology to science suit of which as a basic science beyond practical needs led ultimately to the discovery of the While the contributions of science to technol- Josephson effect in superconductors and the in- ogy are widely understood and acknowledged by vention of the Josephson junction. The develop- both the public and scientists and engineers, the ment and application of superconducting junc- reciprocal dependence of science on technology tions is briefly summarized in Physics Survey both for its agenda and for many of its tools is Committee (1972a, pp. 490-492). In this example, much less well appreciated. This dependence is it is more difficult to decide whether research was more apparent in the ‘chain-link’ iterative model motivated by technology. The Physics Survey of Kline and Rosenberg (1986) than it is in the Committee (1972b) gives numerous examples of linear-sequential model more common until re- the mutual reinforcement of theoretical and tech- cently in public discussions of technological inno- nological stimuli in the co-evolution of a new vation and technology policy. The relationships field of science and technological application, here are also more subtle and require more ex- where the triggering events are difficult to disen- planation. tangle. Observations “are sometimes made in an in- 3.1. Technology as a source of new scientific chal- dustrial context by people who are not capable of lenges appreciating their potential significance” (Rosen- berg, 1991, p. 337) or, perhaps more frequently, Problems arising in industrial development are lack the incentives or resources to pursue, gener- frequently a rich source of challenging basic sci- alize, and interpret the observation, thus lacking ence problems which are first picked up with a the ‘prepared mind’ which is so essential to fun- specific technological problem in mind, but then damental scientific discovery. This may be so pursued by a related basic research community simply because the organization is dependent on well beyond the immediate requirements of the commercial revenue for support, so it cannot original technological application that motivated afford to pursue promising concepts unless their them (Rosenberg, 1991). This research then went potential application is fairly clear and immedi- on to generate new insights and technological ate, or it may be because of a mindset that is ideas from which new and unforeseen technology belittling of mere theory. A classical example is originated. This process has been especially fruit- the so-called Edison effect originally discovered H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology 483 by Thomas A. Edison, but not pursued because much of the focus has been on curative technol- he was too “preoccupied with matters of short-run ogy, anything which could improve the survival utility”. To quote Asimov (1974, p.51, “The Edi- chances of the individual sick patient, compared son effect, then, which the practical Edison with the statistical morbidity or mortality of popu- shrugged off as interesting but useless, turned out lations, has been accorded highest priority, espe- to have more astonishing results than any of his cially in the US. This has led to industries that practical devices.” Indeed, many important ob- are disproportionately R&D intensive with a cor- servations made incidentally during the course of responding emphasis on the science base in re- major industrial or military technological devel- lated fields in academia and government labora- opments may, because of the highly specialized tories. The same motivation has seemed to per- context in which they are made, or because of vade the environmental field in respect to regula- military or proprietary confidentiality, never get tion. However, this has not so far led to a corre- into the general scientific literature, nor get prop- sponding R&D intensity, although there are some erly documented so that they can be understood signs that this might be about to change (cf. and appreciated either by other industrial re- Wald, 1993). searchers or basic scientists interested in and capable of pursuing their broader scientific signif- 3.2. Instrumentation and measurement techniques icance (Alit et al., 1992, pp. 390-393). In addition, of course, technological develop- Technology has played an enormous role in ment indirectly stimulates basic research by at- making it possible to measure natural phenomena tracting new financial resources into research ar- that were not previously accessible to research. eas shown to have practical implications. This has One of the most dramatic recent examples of happened repeatedly for radical inventions such this, of course, has been the role of space tech- as the transistor, the laser, the computer, and nology in making a much greater range of the nuclear fission power, where much of the science, electromagnetic spectrum accessible to measure- even the most basic science, has followed rather ment than was possible when observation was than preceded the original conception of an in- limited by the lack of transparency of the atmo- vention. Indeed, the more radical the invention, sphere to X-rays, y rays, the far ultraviolet, and the more likely it is to stimulate wholly new areas some parts of the infra-red. The sciences of cos- of basic research or to rejuvenate older areas of mology and astrophysics have been revolutionized research that were losing the interest of the most by the opening up of these new windows. In this innovative scientists, e.g. classical optics and particular case, the new capability would proba- atomic and molecular spectroscopy in the case of bly never have been created for scientific pur- the laser, and basic metallurgy and crystal growth poses alone, but basic scientists were quick to and crystal physics in the case of the transistor, as seize the new opportunities that were made avail- well as the burgeoning of the new science of able by the space program. “imperfections in almost perfect crystals” (Shock- In other cases, such as nuclear and elementary ley et al., 1952; Bardeen, 1957). particle physics, much of the new technology has There are two areas in which the search for been developed and engineered by the radical technological breakthroughs has been un- themselves. In perhaps the majority of cases, lab- usually important; defense and health care. In oratory instruments have been originally devel- each case, the value of improved performance oped by research scientists, but were later com- almost regardless of its cost, not only in R&D. mercialized to be sold to a much broader re- but also in ultimate societal performance, has search community. This latter process has been played a fundamental role in stimulating not only very important for the rapid diffusion of new technological development but also related fields experimental techniques and is probably a prime of basic research. In the defense case, it has been mechanism for knowledge transfer between dif- generally believed that even a small technological ferent disciplines, which in turn has greatly accel- edge in the performance of individual weapons erated the progress of science overall. The pat- systems could make all the difference between tern of interaction has been described in the victory and defeat. In the biomedical case, where following terms for the case of the transfer of 484 I% Brooks / The relationship between science and technology physics techniques to chemistry, but this pattern industry, combined with other research supply is similar for transfer between any two disci- industries, comprised an unexcelled infrastruc- plines, or, indeed, for diffusion among re- ture, which may have had much broader general searchers and subfields of a single discipline: utility for commercially oriented innovation than the specific ‘spin-offs’ from highly specialized de- When the method is first discovered, a fense R&D. few chemists, usually physical chemists, be- come aware of chemical applications of the method, construct their own homemade de- 4. The positive externalities of innovative activity vices, and demonstrate the utility of the new tool. At some point commercial models of The interest of economists in the economics of the device are put on the market. These are research, particularly in the economic rationale sometimes superior, sometimes inferior, to for both public and private investment in basic the homemade in terms of their research, is of relatively recent vintage. As pointed ultimate capabilities to provide information. out by Pavitt, economists have made an impor- However, the commercial instruments gen- tant contribution by being the first to articulate erally are easier to use and far more reli- the ‘public good’ aspects of science and conse- able than the homemade devices. The im- quently its eligibility for public or collective sup- pact of the commercial instruments is port. However, as Pavitt also emphasizes, there rapidly felt, is often very far-reaching, and has been considerable confusion in the resulting sometimes virtually revolutionizes the field. public discussion “between the reasonable as- Chemists with the new instruments need sumption that the results of science are a public not be concerned with developing the prin- good . . , and the unreasonable assumption that ciple of the device; they are free to devote they are a free good” (Pavitt, 1991). The latter their efforts to extracting the useful chemi- interpretation has led to a rapidly growing view cal information that application of the de- that the generous public support for academic vice affords. This pattern characterizes the research in the US has been, in effect, a subsidy development of optical, infrared and radio to our overseas competitors who have beat us out frequency spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, in the marketplace by taking advantage of the and X-ray crystallography. (Physics Survey openness of our academic system to commercially Committee, 1972a, p. 1015) exploit research rest&s for which they have not paid. The ‘pure public good’ assumption about The effectiveness of this pattern depends on basic science neglects the fact that a substantial close collaboration between vendors and scien- research capability (and indeed actual ongoing tific users, and between engineers and scientists, participation in research) is required to “under- so that instruments and laboratory techniques stand, interpret and appraise knowledge that has often become a mechanism by which some of the been placed on the shelf - whether basic or pathologies of overspecialization in science are applied. . . The most effective way to remain moderated. The existence of an entrepreneurial plugged into the scientific network is to be a scientific instrument industry, closely coupled to participant in the research process” (Pavitt, 1991) research scientist users, and enjoying the Similarly, Dasgupta has also argued that training economies of scale derived from one of the largest through basic research enables more informed markets of research activity in the world, has choices and recruitment into the technological been an important, and perhaps underestimated, research community. These arguments are cer- source of competitive advantage for the US re- tainly valid, but have proved very difficuit to search system in basic science - an advantage quantify. which was achieved earlier than in other coun- It is notaule that almost all the countries that tries because of the enormous government invest- have successful diffusion-oriented technology ments in defense-related R&D in the US com- policies (, Switzerland, Sweden, Japan, pared with other countries during the first two Korea) that emphasize the rapid adoption and decades following World War II. This instrument diffusion of new technology, especially produc- H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology 485 tion technology, as a national strategic objective cognitive psychology. Furthermore, there is (Ergas, 1987), have among the highest ratios of extensive, often polemical as well as careful R&D expenditure (public and private) to GDP medical documentation that testifies to the among industrialized countries, as well as excep- rampant nonapplication or misapplication tionally high levels of educational performance at of medical knowledge to everyday clinical all levels. It seems reasonable to assume that a situations. . . The difficulties follow from the significant fraction of R&D support in these limitations of unaided human minds in ap- countries is for the purpose of enhancing aware- plying a very large body of knowledge, when ness of what is going on in the world of S&T any portion of that knowledge base is inter- rather than necessarily for generating new knowl- mittently and unpredictably relevant in day- edge for the first time “in the universe” (to use to-day work. Specialization represents an Nelson’s phrase) (Nelson and Rosenberg, 1993). attempt to deal with the problem. Unfortu- In principle, one could argue that there is a nately it runs afoul of the persistent failure trade-off between investment in R&D and in- of real problems to fit within the socially vestment in information infrastructure for the and historically defined boundaries of medi- efficient distribution of R&D results to their cal specialties. Medical knowledge, viewed potential users. The main reason that the perfor- as a whole, is as highly interconnected as mance of R&D is necessary for the absorption the minds and bodies of its subjects. Tracing and appraisal of technology is that scientists en- these interconnections wherever they lead gaged in research actually spend a large fraction in response to a real problem, as if follow- of their time and effort communicating with oth- ing a map, is what medical problem solving ers in order to be able to take the fullest advan- requires. (Weed, 1991, p. xvi) tage of the progress made by others in planning their own research strategy. Thus their excellence Much the same could be said about the huge as a conduit for research knowledge to the orga- body of engineering and scientific knowledge as nizations in which they work tends to be an related to the problems presented in the process automatic by-product of their active engagement of technological innovation and new product de- in research. But still this is no guarantee that velopment in industry. In addition, of course, a their information retrieval habits are optimal from significant proportion of the knowledge required the point of view of fellow engineers or scientists in technological innovation is ‘tacit’ or ‘em- engaged in technological development or new bedded’ in people, not codified or written down, product design. Thus these scientists are not au- and not communicable (at least at present) except tomatically matched in their information retrieval by people working side-by-side. In the innovation behavior to the information needs of the ‘down- process the importance of personal contact and stream’ phases of the innovation process. geographical proximity between the generators Weed (1991) has studied this problem from the and users of knowledge is supported by the ob- standpoint of medical practitioners delivering servation from patenting studies that the aca- health care appropriate to unique individual pa- demic research cited in industrial origi- tients, a process he describes as “problem-knowl- nates to a surprising extent in universities in edge coupling”. The challenge is how to map the relatively close geographical proximity to the vast body of collective knowledge embodied in patenting industrial laboratory (Pavitt, 1991, p. the biomedical literature with the knowledge 116; Jaffe et al., 1993, pp. 577-598). But there is needed to deal with the specific needs implicit in ample other literature citing the importance of the symptoms and medical history of the individ- embedded knowledge. The question suggested by ual patient. According to Weed: Weed’s work is whether dependence on personal contact, tacit knowledge, and ‘serendipity’ to in- Our confidence in our innate human ca- form the application of knowledge could be grad- pacity to make judgments as sound and ually reduced by more systematic exploitation of reliable as our collective knowledge theoret- some of the tools of modern information technol- ically allows is simply unsupported by over ogy, so that performance of research in organiza- 30 years of intensive research in clinical and tions might become less essential to their capacity 486 H. Brooks / The relationship between science and technology for the absorption of technology. I am rather Kline, S.J. and N. Rosenberg, 1986, An overview of innova- inclined to doubt it because the growing ‘scienti- tion, in R. Landau and N. Rosenberg (editors), The Posi- tive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic zation’ of technology is likely to offset greater Growth (National Academy Press, Washington, DC), pp. efficiency in formal systems of knowledge transfer 275-306. from science to technology. Nevertheless, more Asimov, I., 1974, Of what use?, in E.H. Kone and H.J. Jordan effective use of modern information tools, and (editors), The Greatest Adventure: Basic Research that better documentation for future use of organiza- Shapes Our Lives (The Rockefeller University Press, New York). tional experience in the product development Materials Advisory Board, National Research Council, 1966, process could still be of significant value in its Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Principles of Re- own right. search-Engineering Interaction, ARPA, MAB-222-M (National Academy of Sciences-National Research Coun- cil, Washington, DC). Nelson, R.R., 1992, National innovation systems: A retrospec- 5. References tive on a study, Industrial and Corporate Change 1, (21: 347-374. Nelson, R.R. and N. Rosenberg, 1993, Technical innovation Alit, J.A. et al., 1992, Beyond Spinoff, Military and Commer- and national systems, in R.R. Nelson (editor), National cial Technologies in a Changing World (Hatvard Business Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis (Oxford Uni- School Press, Boston, MA), April. versity Press, New York/Oxford), pp. 1-21. Bardeen, J., 1957, Crystal imperfections, in J.E. Goldman Nelson, R.R. and R. Levin, 1986, The influence of university (editor), The Science and Engineering of Materials (Wiley, science research and technical societies on industrial R&D New York), Chapter 4, pp. 82-102. and technical advance, Policy Discussion Paper Series Brooks, H., 1973, The state of the art: technology assessment Number 3, Research Program on Technology Change (Yale as a process, International Social Science Journal 22, (31 University, New Haven, CT). (UNESCO, Paris). Pavitt, K., 1991, What makes basic research economically Brooks, H., 1985, Returns on federal investments: the physical useful?, Research Policy 20: 109-119. sciences, Workshop on The Federal Role In Research and Physics Survey Committee, 1972a, Physics in Perspective, Vol. Development (NAS/NAE/IOM), November (available II, Part A (National Academy of Sciences, Washington, from the NRC Information Office). DC), pp. 490-492. Brooks, H., 1991, Innovation and competitiveness, in The Physics Survey Committee, 1972b, Physics in Perspective, Vol- Technology Race: Can the U.S. Win? The J. Herbert ume II, Part B, The Interfaces (National Academy of Hollomon Memorial Symposium, MIT, April (presented Sciences, Washington, DC), pp. 796-798. by The Technology and Culture Seminar and the Center Rosenberg, N., 1990, Why do firms do basic research (with for Technology Policy and Industrial Development). their own money)?, Research Policy 19: 165-174. Brooks, H., 1993, Regions don’t live on R&D alone, in Rosenberg, N., 1991, Critical issues in research, Connection: New England’s Journal of Higher Science and Public Policy 18 (6): 335-346. and Economic Development, Vol. 8, No. 1, Spring/ Shockley, W.E., J.H. Hollomon, R. Maurer and F. Seitz Summer. (editors), 1952, Imperfections in Nearly Perfect Crystals Charpie, Robert A. (Chair), 1967, Panel on Invention and (Wiley, New York. Innovation, Technological Innovation: Its Environment and Suits, C.G. and A.M. Bueche, 1967, Cases of research and Management, Department of Commerce, January, Chart development in a diversified company, in 7, p. 9. and Technological Progress, House Committee on Science Frederickson, Donald S., 1993, Biomedical science and the and Astronautics, 90th Congress, 1st Session (June), pp. culture warp, in: W.N. Kelley, M. Osterweis and E. Rubin 297-346. (editors), Emerging Policies for Biomedical Research, United States Office of Scientific Research and Development, Health Policy Annual III (Association of Academic Health 1945, Science: The Endless Frontier, A Report to the Centers, Washington, DC). President on a Program for Postwar Scientific Research Ergas, H., 1987, Does technology policy matter?, in B.R. (U.S. National Science Foundation, Washington, DC) (re- Guile and H. Brooks (editors), Technology and Global print, 1960). Industry: Companies and Nations in the Wald, M.L.,1993, Government dream , Washington and (National Academy Press, Washington, DC), pp. 191-245. Detroit pool resources to devise new approach to technol- Jaffe, A.B., M. Trajtenberg and R. Henderson, 1993, Geo- ogy, The New York Times, 30 September, pp. Al, D7. graphic localization of knowledge spillover as evidenced by Weed, L.L., 1991, Knowledge Coupling: New Premises and citations, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 108, New Tools for Medical Care and Education (Springer, (31: 577-598. New York).