Periodically (as is the case with creationists in another very different area) voices appear that question the public role in R&D and innovation. No one questions the existence of different global economic models. There are different economic models, with their defects and their virtues. But there are no different models regarding the role of the public sector in the production of knowledge, technology and innovation. In all countries with relevant science, innovation and technology systems, the public sector has had and has a key role to play. There is no possibility of having a system of science, innovation and technology minimally articulated without participation of the public sector. In fact, this teaching comes largely from a very liberal economy, such as the United States.
There are only four aspects that can be different in this area in all the countries of the world:
- The greater or lesser amounts devoted to the field in the public budgets,
- The greater or lesser selectivity in the allocation of resources. For example,
- United States is very selective, very vertical. It is said that the best but also the worst universities in the world are there
- Europe is more transversal, which also motivates that some European countries don’t have many universities in the top of the rankings.
- The greatest codification of a strategy of science, technology and innovation. For example, the United States openly states that they do not have this strategy, at least in the innovation area.
- The programs and instruments used
The global public scientific system is defined by producing knowledge of free disclosure and diffusion and it is based on a competition: a race to publish. This phrase, which I would like the reader to re-read again, translates all the ideas that define the current production of knowledge in the public research system. These are:
- The model is the same in any country in the world
- The knowledge generated is not private; it is in the public domain (and has been rapidly published). This allows other researchers to take the contribution of a scientist and try to improve it, make it advance or overcome. This is the basic principle that motives Science to evolve and progress. In fact, it is the same principle on which the world patent system is based (although in the case of patents a right to a monopoly is granted in exchange for disclosure)
- The promotion of researchers is based on a specific output: publications, in specialized and referenced journals. This race to publish pretends the scientific prestige of the individuals.
The sociology of science has long made it clear that the currency in the reward structure that governs the global scientific community is the establishment of the so-called “priority” of the discovery or development. This allows researchers to build an individual reputation within the collegiate group. The competition for this priority allows us (the society, the Civilization) to cover two purposes: 1) Speed up the discoveries and 2) shorten their disclosure (they “are pressed” to publish).
The diffusion of knowledge is therefore consubstantial to the scientific world. There are thousands and thousands of journals of scientific diffusion. They publish the advances of Science. These thousands of journals constitute[1] a relevant aspect of our society and a fundamental pillar of the advance of the knowledge frontier. These magazines have also been configured as a sector of economic activity. There are databases (similar to those of patents) that concentrate these publications (today the libraries of the universities no longer have these copies in paper) and companies specialized in tracking those databases that search and synthesize the information they contain. The users of these databases and the clients of these specialized companies are:
- The same scientists, who need to know at a global level the advances of their field as well as the achievements of their competitors, researchers from other universities, hospitals, etc., located anywhere in the world
- Patent offices, which integrate these scientific articles in the state of the art when assessing what is and what is not patentable for an invention in any country of the world
- Companies, which develop the discoveries of scientists and then apply them in their products and processes.
- Finally, the governments themselves that finance the research. After years of granting aid to their research groups, a government may need to know how they are located on the world scientific map and in what particular areas they are publishing. Scientometrics and bibliometric analysis serve them well.
So, how does this global scientific system work?
- Universities, hospitals, public research centers (such as the American federal research institutes, the Spanish CSIC, the French CNRS, the Catalan CeRCA, the German MaxPlanck, etc.) hire research staff, in charge of their budgets. But in general (the models are slightly different depending on the country and the type of center) the contracts assume a salary that is halfway between: 1) A too low amount that discourages any researcher (and especially the good ones), and 2) An excessively high amount, which discourages the future carrying out of activities, the personal initiative. In universities and hospitals the salary covers the teaching and assistance activities of teachers and doctors.
- From here, every researcher is free to do more or less. Most take on the challenge of building a research team. To this end, over the years, he or she will build that research team going to competitive external funding.
- To provide such external competitive funding, all (all) countries and almost all regions in the world have their National Plans or their Regional R&D Plans. In broad outline, these plans are two things:
- An economic quantity, which measures the ambition -and capacity- of the country or region: what part of the production of the global knowledge that country or region seeks to create.
- The relationship of scientific and technological areas as well as the social challenges that the government of that country or region wants to prioritize
- Important: Those R&D plans are the factor that moves the entire research community of the country towards some (and no others) scientific, technological and social objectives. Complaints are often made in the sense that “researchers should focus on the needs of business”. Our researchers are devoted to what society (we) asks to them through the government and the R&D plans (another issue is collaboration with companies, which we explain in a moment).
- To these state and regional plans, Europe today adds its H2020 program, which is gradually replacing the scientific and technological “autonomy” of the European states and regions. Today, the main challenges of society to which researchers must devote their efforts are defined at European level (and the main funding is also there).
- How do researchers go to these R&D plans? By presenting research proposals, in an open and competitive process (by call). It is a competition with the entire scientific community that can access to the same plans. The evaluation process is peer-review. The application will be more or less competitive depending on the curriculum of the research group. This curriculum is valued mainly through the scientific publications that the research group has in journals of scientific impact.
- For an emerging group it is difficult to compete with established research groups. For this reason, research centers (universities, hospitals, etc.) and state and regional R&D plans often include specific calls for emerging groups.
- Therefore, an investigator, in his or her initial training phase, starts to apply for aid to these regional or state R & D plans (and more and more to private foundations dedicated to funding research). With the funds received he or she does the work: acquires scientific equipment, hires new researchers and grants doctoral fellowships (Ph.D. students are a key piece of global science). The researcher gradually forms a research group that usually specializes in a particular field.
- In times of crisis and economic weakness, research groups are forced to give up their growth (not hiring new doctors who for 4 years have made a doctoral thesis in the group) or even dismissing researchers.
- Universities, hospitals and other research centers, to facilitate the more routine management work (hiring, salaries, purchases of equipment, etc.) to their hundreds of scientists and research groups, have articulated the so-called Research Offices. These offices do this work but in return “charge” a percentage for the management (and for other concepts derived from the research activity in the center). This overhead varies but is usually between 20% and 50% depending on institutions and countries.
- In this way, the research group advances and as it consolidates, it has the technical and human resources and knowledge to act as an R & D provider for the business sector. It then establishes contracts with companies, which in the university, hospital or research center are managed by the Research Office in the same way as the public aids mentioned before.
- In addition, some research projects can produce results with potential commercial application. The research group will therefore generate patents, which may be licensed by the institution’s Technology Transfer Office, or even can create spin-offs (which take advantage of those doctors that were not hired by the research group).
- Therefore, the research group acts as a quasi-company being the researcher its CEO. Some research groups manage budgets equivalent to many medium companies. If the group is growing or if it establishes agreements with other groups, it can end up becoming an Institute or Research Center, already with own legal personality. Interestingly, many prominent research centers have been generated in this way. There has therefore been no top-down will, but priority has been given to what has best grown from the bottom.
It is a tremendously competitive system, as much as the business world (or maybe more).
[1] Although today the model begins to change, going to an open system.