Abstract
Martin andIrvine believe that their bibliometric data indicates that British science is in decline. This paper shows that, in fact, their data points to a considerable expansion in British science. To account for different countries' scientific performance, this paper generates simple predictive formulae that correlate Gross National Product with research output.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Editorial, Bringing research back to life,Nature, 344 (1990) 275.
B.R. Martin, J. Irvine, R. Turner, The writing on the wall for British science,New Scientist, 104 (1984) 25–29.
J. Irvine, B. Martin, T. Peacock, R. Turner, Charting the decline in British science,Nature 316 (1985) 587–590.
B.R. Martin, J. Irvine, F. Narin, C. Sterritt, The continuing decline of British science,Nature, 330 (1987) 123–126.
J. Irvine, B.R. Martin, Is Britain spending enough on science?,Nature, 323 (1986) 591–594.
Evaluation of National Performance in Basic Research, ABRC Science Policy Studies, No. 1 (1986) Department of Education and Science, U.K.
An International Comparison of Government Funding of Academic and Academically Related Research, ABRC Science Studies, No. 2 (1986).
T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Assessing assessments of British science: some facts and figures to accept or decline,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 165–170.
B.R. Martin, The bibliometric assessment of UK scientific performance — a reply to Braun, Glänzel and Schubert,Scientometrics, 20 (1990) this issue.
Science Policy Research Unit Annual Report 1989–1990, University of Sussex, 1990.
University Statistics 1986–87, pubs. University Grants Committee, 1988.
Information provided by the Association of Medical Charities, London.
J. Bray,Science for the Citizen, pubs. Labour Party, London, 1989.
The Case for Increased Investment in our Universities, Association of Universe Teachers, London, 1989.
F. Bacon,The Advancement of Learning, London, 1605.
A. Smith,The Wealth of Nations, London, 1776.
R. Solow, Technical change and the aggregate production functions,Review of Economics and Statistics, 39 (1957) 312–320.
E. Gibbon,Autobiography, London, 1796.
S. Johnson, Journey to the Western Islands, London, 1775.
A. Bloom,The Closing of the American Mind, Simon and Schuster, USA; Penguin Books, UK, 1987.
N. Rosenberg,Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982.
J. Langrish, M. Gibbons, W.G. Evans, F.R. Jevons,Wealth from Knowledge: A Study of Innovation in Industry, Macmillan, London, 1972.
C. Barnett,The Audit of War, Macmillans, London, 1986.
L. Stone, Literacy and education in England 1640–1900,Past and Present, 42 (1969) 69–139.
C. Babbage, The decline of science in England,Nature, 340 (1989) 499–502.
T. Williams,The Triumph of Invention, MacDonald, London, 1987.
H. M. TREASURY, Central Statistical Office; quoted inThe Independent on Sunday, 27th May 1990. U.K.
F.A. Hayek,The Road to Serfdom, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1944.
K. Arrow,The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton University Press, 1962.
R. Nelson, The simple economics of basic scientific research,Journal of Political Economy, 67 (1959) 297–306.
N. Rosenberg, Why do firms do basic research with their own money,Research Policy, 19 (1990) 165–174.
T. Kealey in:Ideas and Politics in Modern Britain,J.C.D. Clark, (Ed.), Macmillan, London, 1990.
M.L. Dertouzos, R.K. Lester, R.M. Solow Made in America: Regaining the Productive Edge, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. USA, 1989.
D. Noble, Britain's culture in crisis,Independent, 13th January 1987.
British science over the hill, Editorial,Nature, 323 (1986) 655–656.
J-J Rousseau,Discours sur les sciences et les arts, Paris, 1750.
J. Swift,Gulliver's Travels, London, 1726.
ACOST,Developments in Biotechnology, HMSO, London, 1990.
S. Dickman, J. Maddox, Science in Switzerland,Nature, 336 (1988) 323–340.
B.R. Williams, Research and economic growth—What should we except?Minerva, 3 (1964) 57–71.
T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert,Scientometrics, 13 (1988) 181.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kealey, T. Government-funded academic science is a consumer good, not a producer good: A comparative reassessment of Britain's scientific and technological achievements since 1794 and a comment on the bibliometry of B. Martin and J. Irvine. Scientometrics 20, 369–394 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017527
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017527