The Scientific World Is Round - Science Progress

Description Click to Edit

In the research system of the future, Caroline Wagner imagines that science funders will be blind to national borders. The Canadian government would be just as happy to fund a proposal from Argentina as it would from Quebec, because the new knowledge generated will diffuse across the international scientific community, benefiting everyone around the globe.

Wagner, a research scientist at the George Washington University Center for International Science and Technology Policy, examines the complex international system that drives science and innovation in her new book, The New Invisible College. The current system has its roots in the “invisible college” of Enlightenment thinkers who laid the foundations of the modern scientific community.

Recently, Science Progress editor-in-chief Jonathan Moreno spoke with Wagner about her book, ranging across topics from international government funding of science to intellectual property rights and the future of scientific policy for the next hundred years. Here are some highlights from the discussion, which has been edited and condensed.

Jonathan Moreno, Science Progress: We’re now in the mists of this financial crisis, and it looks like we’re going to be in the midst of it for years to come. What does the new invisible college have to offer us as far as guidelines for doing science policy, investing in science in the midst of this unprecedented period in which capitalism—some of the fundamental notions of one kind of capitalism—seem to be at risk?

Caroline Wagner: One element of that question that is relevant is time that it takes for a new idea or innovation to enter into common usage in the marketplace. So that’s one place where it shows that that cycle can take 15 to 30 years time, depending on the innovation, the scale and scope of the production, and so on required. On the other end of that, science is really very good at solving problems, at solving even local problems.

For example, the work I did on the UN Millennium Development Task Force—we were looking at the Millennium Development Goals and trying to identify ways in which science and technology could help to solve those problems now—clean water, maternal health, getting textbooks to student who need them. These are critical needs that will transcend any financial crisis and providing for those needs will really contribute to global stability, and will contribute to the reduction of war.

We need to rethink science. We tended to think of science as the trip to the moon, as the AIDS vaccine. These are great things and I love them too. The difference is now, as opposed to previous periods, is that we have this cadre of knowledge that we can’t loose it. It’s so critical to our potential as a civilization. We have this knowledge. We can use it, if we can make it available so that people can solve problems locally.

One of the great unsung stories of science success is the agricultural extension service in the United States. It is a case where local loops and experimentation, along with integrated learning, diffused information over time. This is a beautiful example, and shouldn’t be lost on us so that we’re focused on questions like “are we funding the greatest physics ever?” Let’s look at funding that answer the question, “how do we make individual people’s lives better?”

So I think science policy now should focus on local learning. Make it a feedback loop. Hopefully we won’t loose the Internet; it’s a great tool. It is a way in which people can use this knowledge that can solve local problems.

In the research system of the future, Caroline Wagner imagines that science funders will be blind to national borders. The Canadian government would be just as happy to fund a proposal from Argentina as it would from Quebec, because the new knowledge generated will diffuse across the international scientific community, benefiting everyone around the globe.

Wagner, a research scientist at the George Washington University Center for International Science and Technology Policy, examines the complex international system that drives science and innovation in her new book, The New Invisible College. The current system has its roots in the “invisible college” of Enlightenment thinkers who laid the foundations of the modern scientific community.

Recently, Science Progress editor-in-chief Jonathan Moreno spoke with Wagner about her book, ranging across topics from international government funding of science to intellectual property rights and the future of scientific policy for the next hundred years. Here are some highlights from the discussion, which has been edited and condensed.

Jonathan Moreno, Science Progress: We’re now in the mists of this financial crisis, and it looks like we’re going to be in the midst of it for years to come. What does the new invisible college have to offer us as far as guidelines for doing science policy, investing in science in the midst of this unprecedented period in which capitalism—some of the fundamental notions of one kind of capitalism—seem to be at risk?

Caroline Wagner: One element of that question that is relevant is time that it takes for a new idea or innovation to enter into common usage in the marketplace. So that’s one place where it shows that that cycle can take 15 to 30 years time, depending on the innovation, the scale and scope of the production, and so on required. On the other end of that, science is really very good at solving problems, at solving even local problems.

For example, the work I did on the UN Millennium Development Task Force—we were looking at the Millennium Development Goals and trying to identify ways in which science and technology could help to solve those problems now—clean water, maternal health, getting textbooks to student who need them. These are critical needs that will transcend any financial crisis and providing for those needs will really contribute to global stability, and will contribute to the reduction of war.

We need to rethink science. We tended to think of science as the trip to the moon, as the AIDS vaccine. These are great things and I love them too. The difference is now, as opposed to previous periods, is that we have this cadre of knowledge that we can’t loose it. It’s so critical to our potential as a civilization. We have this knowledge. We can use it, if we can make it available so that people can solve problems locally.

One of the great unsung stories of science success is the agricultural extension service in the United States. It is a case where local loops and experimentation, along with integrated learning, diffused information over time. This is a beautiful example, and shouldn’t be lost on us so that we’re focused on questions like “are we funding the greatest physics ever?” Let’s look at funding that answer the question, “how do we make individual people’s lives better?”

So I think science policy now should focus on local learning. Make it a feedback loop. Hopefully we won’t loose the Internet; it’s a great tool. It is a way in which people can use this knowledge that can solve local problems.

Original URL Click to Edit

http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/11/the-scientific-world-is-round/

http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/11/the-scientific-world-is-round/

Websites

• 

  The New Invisible College - Brookings Institution

  http://www.brookings.edu/press/Books/2007/newinvisiblecollege.aspx