Basic research is a central concept of science and science policy. This article examines the role statistics played in helping to create the concept and shows how it was in part constructed by statistics to serve social and political agendas. Most of this statistical work was conducted in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s, then standardized by the OECD in the 1960s.
Alonso, W. and Starr, P. (1987) The Politics of Numbers. New York: Russell Sage.
2.
Arendt, H. (1958) Condition de l'homme moderne. Paris: Calmann-Lévy.
3.
Arrow, K. J. (1962) “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention”, in National Bureau of Economic Research (ed.) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pp. 609-626. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Auger, P. (1961) Tendances actuelles de la recherche scientifique. Paris: UNESCO.
5.
Averch, H. A. (1991) “The Political Economy of R&D Taxonomies”, Research Policy20: 179-194.
6.
Belanger, D. O. (1998) Enabling American Innovation: Engineering and the National Science Foundation. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
7.
Bernal, J. D. (1939) The Social Function of Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Blanpied, W. A. (1999) “Science and Public Policy: The Steelman Report and the Politics of Post-World War II Science Policy”, in AAAS Science and Technology Policy Yearbook, pp. 305-320. Washington, DC: AAAS.
9.
Branscomb, L. M. (1993) “Targeting Critical Technologies”, in L. M. Branscomb (ed.) Empowering Technology: Implementing a US Strategy, pp. 36-63. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
Branscomb, L. M. (1998) “From Science Policy to Research Policy”, in L. M. Branscomb and J. H. Keller (eds) Investing in Innovation: Creating a Research Innovation Policy That Works, pp. 112-139. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
Branscomb, L. M. (1999) “The False Dichotomy: Scientific Creativity and Utility”, Issues in Science and Technology (Fall) 66-72.
12.
Brooks, H. (1963) “Basic Research and Potentials of Relevance”, American Behavioral Scientist6 (May): 86-90.
13.
Brooks, H. (1967) “Applied Research: Definitions, Concepts, Themes”, in National Academy of Sciences Applied Science and Technological Progress, pp. 21-55. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
14.
Brooks, H. (1980) “Basic and Applied Research”, in National Science Foundation Categories of Scientific Research, pp. 14-18. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
15.
Brooks, H. (1994) “The Relationship Between Science and Technology”, Research Policy23: 477-486.
16.
Brown, A. E. (1972) “New Definitions for Industrial R&D”, Research Management (September) 55-57.
17.
Bush, V. (1945) Science: The Endless Frontier. North Stratford, NH: Ayer.
18.
Cohen, I. B. (1948) Science Servant of Men. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
19.
Crow, M. and Tucker, C. (2001) “The American Research University System as America's de facto Technology Policy”, Science and Public Policy28(1): 2-10.
20.
Daniels, G. H. (1967) “The Pure-Science Ideal and Democratic Culture”, Science156: 1699-1705.
21.
David, E. E. (1980) “Some Comments on Research Definitions”, in NSF Categories of Scientific Research, pp. 40-42. Washington, DC: NSF.
22.
Desrosières, A. (1990) “How to Make Things Which Hold Together: Social Science, Statistics and the State”, in P. Wagner, B. Wittrock and R. Whitley (eds) Discourses on Society, pp. 195-218. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
23.
Desrosières, A. (1993) La politique des grands nombres. Paris: La Découverte.
24.
Dewey, J. (1929) The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. New York: Milton, Balch.
25.
DTI/OST (2000) Science Budget 2001-02 to 2003-04. London: HMSO.
26.
Dupree, A. H. (1957) Science in the Federal Government: A History of Policies and Activities to 1940. New York: Harper and Row.
27.
England, J. M. (1982) A Patron for Pure Science: The NSF'S Formative Years, 1945-1957. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
28.
European Union (2001) Statistics in Focus2: 4.
29.
Falk, C. (1973) “An Operational, Policy-Oriented Research Categorization Scheme”, Research Policy2: 186-202.
30.
Freeman, C. and Young, A. (1965) The Research and Development Effort in Western Europe, North America and the Soviet Union: An Experimental International Comparison of Research Expenditures and Manpower in 1962. Paris: OECD.
31.
GAO (1987) US Science and Engineering Base: A Synthesis of Concerns About Budget and Policy Development. Washington, DC: USGPO.
32.
Gardner, P. L. (1994) “The Relationship Between Technology and Science: Some Historical and Philosophical Reflections, Part I”, International Journal of Technology and Design Education4: 123-153.
33.
Gardner, P. L. (1995) “The Relationship Between Technology and Science: Some Historical and Philosophical Reflections, Part II”, International Journal of Technology and Design Education5: 1-33.
34.
Gieryn, T. F. (1983) “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science From Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists”, American Sociological Review48: 781-795.
35.
Godin, Benoît (2001a) Defining Research: Is Research Always Systematic?Project on the History and Sociology of S&T Statistics. Montreal: OST. (Available at: http://www.ost.qc.ca/OSTE/Document/Defining_Research.pdf)
36.
Godin, Benoît (2001b) “Outlines for a History of Science Measurement”, Science, Technology and Human Values27(1): 3-27.
37.
Golden, W. T. (1951) “Memorandum on Program for the National Science Foundation”, in W. A. Blanpied (ed.) Impacts of the Early Cold War on the Formulation of US Science Policy, pp. 68-72. Washington, DC: AAAS.
38.
Golinksi, J. (1992) Science as Public Culture: Chemistry and Enlightenment in Britain, 1760-1820. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Gruender, C. D. (1971) “On Distinguishing Science and Technology”, Technology and Culture12(3): 456-463.
40.
Hahn, R. (1971) The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences, 1666-1803. Berkeley: University of California Press.
41.
Hall, A. R. (1974) “What Did the Industrial Revolution in Britain Owe to Science?”, in M. McKendrick (ed.) Historical Perspectives: Studies in English Thought and Society, pp. 129-151. London: Europa.
42.
Hart, D. M. (1998) Forged Consensus: Science, Technology and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921-1953. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
43.
Hensley, O. D. (1988) The Classification of Research. Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press.
44.
Hertzfeld, H. R. (1985) Definitions of Research and Development for Tax Credit Legislation. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
45.
HMSO (1961) The Management and Control of R&D. London: Office of the Minister of Science.
46.
HMSO (1971) A Framework for Government Research and Development. London: HMSO.
47.
HMSO (1972) First Report from the Select Committee on Science and Technology. London: HMSO.
48.
HMSO (1985) Annual Review of Government Funded R&D. London: HMSO.
49.
HMSO (1990) Definitions of R&D, Select Committee on Science and Technology, HL Paper 44. London: HMSO.
50.
HMSO (1999) Science, Engineering and Technology Statistics 1999. London: DTI/OST.
51.
Holton, G. (1993) “On the Jeffersonian Research Program”, in G. HoltonScience and Anti-Science, pp. 109-125. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
52.
Hounshell, D. A. (1980) “Edison and the Pure Science Ideal in 19th Century America”, Science207: 612-617.
53.
Huxley, J. S. (1934) Scientific Research and Social Needs. London: Watts.
54.
IRI (Industrial Research Institute) (1978) Definitions of Research and Development. New York: IRI.
55.
Irvine, J. and Martin, B. R. (1984) Foresight in Science: Picking the Winners. London: Frances Pinter.
56.
Jewett, F. B. (1937) “Communication Engineering”, Science85: 591-594.
57.
Keller, A. (1984) “Has Science Created Technology?”, Minerva22(2): 160-182.
58.
Kidd, C. V. (1959) “Basic Research: Description versus Definition”, Science129: 368-371.
59.
Kline, R. (1995) “Constructing Technology as Applied Science: Public Rhetoric of Scientists and Engineers in the United States, 1880-1945”, ISIS86: 194-221.
60.
Kohler, R. E. (1991) Partners in Science: Foundations and Natural Scientists 1900-1945. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
61.
Kranakis, E. (1990) “Technology, Industry, and Scientific Development”, in T. Frangsmyr (ed.) Solomon's House Revisited: The Organization and Institutionalization of Science, pp. 133-159. Canton, MA: Science History Publications.
62.
Langenberg, D. N. (1980) Memorandum for Members of the National Science Board, NSB-80-358. Washington, DC: NSB.
63.
Larsen, O. N. (1992) Milestones and Millstones: Social Science at the NSF, 1945-1991. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
64.
Larson, C. F. (2000) “The Boom in Industry Research”, Issues in Science and Technology (Summer) 27-31.
65.
Layton, E. T. (1974) “Technology as Knowledge”, Technology and Culture15(1): 31-41.
66.
Layton, E. T. (1976) “American Ideologies of Science and Engineering”, Technology and Culture17(4): 688-700.
67.
Lloyd, G. E. R. (1966) Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
Lobkowicz, N. (1967) Theory and Practice: History of a Concept From Aristotle to Marx. London: University of Notre Dame.
69.
NAS (National Academy of Sciences) (1965) Basic Research and National Goals. Washington, DC: NAS.
70.
Nason, H. K. (1981) “Distinctions Between Basic and Applied in Industrial Research”, Research Management (May) 23-28.
71.
National Resources Committee (1980) Research: A National Resource. New York: Arno Press. (Orig. published 1938.)
72.
Nelson, R. R. (1959) “The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research”, Journal of Political Economy67: 297-306.
73.
NRC (National Research Council) (1995) Committee on Criteria for Federal Support of R&DAllocating Federal Funds for Science and Technology, p. 77. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
74.
NSB (National Science Board) (1978) Basic Research in the Mission Agencies: Agency Perspectives on the Conduct and Support of Basic Research. Washington, DC: NSB.
75.
NSF (1951) First Annual Report: 1950-1951. Washington, DC: NSF.
76.
NSF (1953a) Federal Funds for Science: 1950-1951 and 1951-1952. Washington, DC: NSF.
77.
NSF (1953b) Federal Funds for Science: Federal Funds for Scientific R&D at Nonprofit Institutions, 1950-1951 and 1951-1952. Washington, DC: NSF.
78.
NSF (1953c) Federal Funds for Science: The Federal R&D Budget, Fiscal Years 1952 and 1953. Washington, DC: NSF.
79.
NSF (1954) Federal Funds for Science: Fiscal Years 1953, 1954 and 1955. Washington, DC: NSF.
80.
NSF (1957) Basic Research: A National Resource. Washington, DC: NSF.
81.
NSF (1959) Science and Engineering in American Industry: Report on a 1956 Survey. Washington, DC: NSF.
82.
NSF (1961) Investing in Scientific Progress. Washington, DC: NSF.
83.
NSF (1968) Technology in Retrospect and Critical Events in Science (TRACES). Washington, DC: NSF.
84.
NSF (1973) Interactions of Science and Technology in the Innovation Process. Washington, DC: NSF.
85.
NSF (1980a) Categories of Scientific Research. Washington, DC: NSF.
86.
NSF (1980b) How Basic Research Reaps Unexpected Rewards. Washington, DC: NSF.
87.
NSF (1989) Report of the Task Force on R&D Taxonomy. Washington, DC: NSF.
88.
NSF (1990) Estimating Basic and Applied R&D in Industry: A Preliminary Review of Survey Procedures, NSF 90-322. Washington, DC: NSF.
89.
OECD (1963a) J. C. Gerritsen, J. Perlman, L. A. Seymour and G. McColm Government Expenditures on R&D in the United States of America and Canada: Comparisons with France and the United Kingdom on Definitions Scope and Methods Concerning Measurement, DAS/PD/63.23. Paris: OECD.
90.
OECD (1963b) Resources of Scientific and Technical Personnel in the OECD Area. Paris: OECD.
91.
OECD (1963c) Science, Economic Growth and Government Policy. Paris: OECD.
92.
OECD (1963d) K. S. Arnow Some Conceptual Problems Arising in Surveys of Scientific Activities, DAS/PD/63.37. Paris: OECD.
93.
OECD (1963e) C. Oger Critères et catégories de recherche, DAS/PD/63.30. Paris: OECD.
94.
OECD (1963f) K. Sanow Survey of Industrial Research and Development in the United States: Its History, Character, Problems, and Analytical Uses of Data, DAS/PD/63.38. Paris: OECD.
95.
OECD (1963g) The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Development. Paris: OECD.
96.
OECD (1964) Some Notes on Expenditures for Fundamental Research, C.S-C1/CC/2/64/3. Paris: OECD.
97.
OECD (1965) Répertoire des activités de l'Agence européenne de productivité, 1953-1961. Paris: OECD.
98.
OECD (1966) Technological Forecasting in Perspective, DAS/SPR/66.12. Paris: OECD.
99.
OECD (1967) A Study of Resources Devoted to R&D in OECD Member Countries in 1963/64: The Overall Level and Structure of R&D Efforts in OECD Member Countries, Volume I. Paris: OECD.
100.
OECD (1970) The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development. Paris: OECD.
101.
OECD (1973) Results of the Meeting of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts on R&D Statistics, DAS/SPR/73.61. Paris: OECD.
102.
OECD (1978) Report of the Second Ad Hoc Review Group on R&D Statistics, SPT (78) 6. Paris: OECD.
103.
OECD (1991a) Distinction Between Pure and Transfer Sciences, DST/STII(91)12. Paris: OECD.
104.
OECD (1991b) The Pure and Transfer Sciences, DSTI/STII(91)27. Paris: OECD.
OECD (1993a) Summary Record of the NESTI Meeting, DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI/M (93) 1. Paris: OECD.
107.
OECD (1993b) The Importance of Strategic Research Revisited, DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI(93)10. Paris: OECD.
108.
OECD (1993c) Treatment of Strategic Research in the Final Version of Frascati Manual - 1992, DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI/RD(93)5. Paris: OECD.
109.
OECD (1994) The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development. Paris: OECD.
110.
OECD (2000a) Ad Hoc Meeting on the Revision of the Frascati Manual R&D Classifications: Basic Research, DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI/RD (2000) 24. Paris: OECD.
111.
OECD (2000b) Review of the Frascati Manual: Classification by Type of Activity, DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI/RD(2000)4. Paris: OECD.
OECD (2001) Main Science and Technology Indicators, I. Paris: OECD.
114.
OEEC (1955) Shortages and Surpluses of Highly Qualified Scientists and Engineers in Western Europe. Paris: OEEC.
115.
OEEC (1957) The Problem of Scientific and Technical Manpower in Western Europe, Canada and the United States. Paris: OEEC.
116.
OEEC (1961) Government Expenditures on R&D in France and the United Kingdom, EPA/AR/4209. Paris: OEEC.
117.
Pavitt, K. (1987) “The Objectives of Technology Policy”, Science and Public Policy14(4): 182-188.
118.
Pavitt, K. (1989) What Do We Know About the Usefulness of Science? The Case for Diversity, Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) Discussion Paper no. 65. Brighton: University of Sussex.
119.
Pavitt, K. (1991) “What Makes Basic Research Economically Useful?”, Research Policy20: 109-119.
120.
Perazich, G. and Field, P. M. (1940) Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques. Philadelphia, PA: Works Progress Administration.
121.
Reagan, M. D. (1967) “Basic and Applied Research: A Meaningful Distinction?”, Science155: 1383-1386.
122.
Reingold, N. (1987) “V. Bush's New Deal for Research”, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences17(2): 299-344.
123.
Reingold, N. (1991) “American Indifference to Basic Research: A Reappraisal”, in Science: American Style, pp. 54-75. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Rutgers University Press. (Orig. published 1971.)
124.
Roqué, X. (1997) “Marie Curie and the Radium Industry: A Preliminary Sketch”, History and Technology13(4): 267-291.
125.
Rosenberg, N. (1982) “How Exogenous is Science?”, in Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, pp. 141-159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
126.
Rosenberg, N. (1991) “Critical Issues in Science Policy Research”, Science and Public Policy18(6): 335-346.
127.
Rosenberg, N. and Nelson, R. R. (1994) “American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry”, Research Policy3: 323-348.
128.
Rothschild, L. (1972) “Forty-Five Varieties of Research (and Development)”, Nature239: 373-378.
129.
Rowland, H. (1902) “A Plea for Pure Science”, in The Physical Papers of Henry Augustus Rowland, pp. 593-613. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Orig. published 1883.)
130.
Sapolsky, H. M. (1990) Science and the Navy: The History of the Office of Naval Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
131.
Schmookler, J. (1962) “Catastrophe and Utilitarianism in the Development of Basic Science”, in R. A. Tybout (ed.) Economics of R&D, pp. 19-33. Colombus: Ohio State University Press.
132.
Shepard, H. A. (1956) “Basic Research and the Social System of Pure Science”, Philosophy of Science23(1): 48-57.
133.
Shryock, R. H. (1948) “American Indifference to Basic Research During the Nineteenth Century”, Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Sciences28: 50-65.
134.
Smith, B. L. R. (1990) American Science Policy Since World War II. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
135.
Staudenmaier, J. M. (1985) Technology's Storytellers: Reweaving the Human Fabric. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
136.
Steelman, J. R. (1980) Science and Public Policy. New York: Arno Press. (Orig. published 1947.)
137.
Stewart, L. (1992) The Rise of Public Science: Rhetoric, Technology, and Natural Philosophy in Newtonian Britain, 1660-1750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
138.
Stokes, D. E. (1980) “Making Sense of the Basic/Applied Distinction: Lessons From Public Policy Programs”, in NSF Categories of Scientific Research, pp. 24-27. Washington, DC: NSF.
139.
Stokes, D. E. (1982) “Perceptions of the Nature of Basic and Applied Science in the United States”, in A. Gerstenfeld (ed.) Science Policy Perspectives: USA-Japan, pp. 1-18. New York: Academic Press.
140.
Stokes, D. E. (1997) Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
141.
Storer, N. W. (1964) “Basic Versus Applied Research: The Conflict Between Means and Ends in Science”, Indian Sociological Bulletin2(1): 34-42.
142.
Tocqueville, A. de (1975) Democracy in America. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. (Orig. published 1845.)
143.
Toulmin, S. (1980) “A Historical Reappraisal”, in NSF Categories of Scientific Research, pp. 9-13. Washington, DC: NSF.
144.
Truman, H. S. (1948) Address to the Centennial Anniversary, AAAS Annual Meeting. Washington, DC: AAAS.
145.
Turner, F. M. (1980) “Public Science in Britain, 1880-1919”, ISIS71: 589-608.
146.
Vincenti, W. G. (1990) What Engineers Know and How They Know It. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
147.
Waterman, A. T. (1965) “The Changing Environment of Science”, Science147(3653): 13-18.
148.
Weaver, W. (1960) “A Great Age for Science”, in President's Commission on National Goals, pp. 101-124. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
149.
Werskey, G. (1978) The Visible College: The Collective Biography of British Scientific Socialists of the 1930s. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
150.
Wise, G. (1985) “Science and Technology”, OSIRIS1: 229-246.
151.
Wolfe, D. (1959) “The Support of Basic Research: Summary of the Symposium”, in NSF Symposium on Basic Research, pp. 249-280. Washington: AAAS.
