From
Archimedes to Edison, attempts to improve quality of life have dictated a need
for advances in science and technology. These advances are now widely
understood as the key enablers of increasingly prosperous societies.
Despite
this long history, the process of managing the expanding frontiers of new
knowledge in a way that will benefit society is a work in progress. This is
largely due to the unpredictable nature of scientific discovery most famously
illustrated by Archimedes, when, upon stepping into the bath, he suddenly
realised that the volume of water displaced was equal to the volume of the
submerged portion of his body.
His
discovery provided the solution to the previously intractable problem of
measuring the volume of irregular objects and led to further advances in
assessing the density and purity of precious metals among other things. In the
modern world little has changed in how new knowledge is acquired.
However, in
an attempt to get the best value for their limited investments, governments
have devised processes to manage its discovery.
Interestingly
there has been a propensity to divide scientific research into a
one-dimensional continuum starting with pure (sometimes known as blue-skies)
research progressing through to applied research and on to technology transfer;
the defining characteristic of pure research being that it seeks new knowledge
with no view as to its application, while applied research seeks solutions to
industrial problems.
Such a
continuum has been the basis of R&D funding prioritisation in advanced
economies around the world since it was promulgated by Vannevar Bush following
World War II. In the past few years this mindset has been challenged as it does
not accurately reflect the process of science and technology development.
The
dynamic nature of the discovery of new knowledge and its commercial application
can be observed in the remarkable career of French chemist and microbiologist
Louis Pasteur, whose breakthroughs ranged from the first rabies and anthrax
vaccines to paving the way for germ theory and pasteurisation. Pasteur was not
driven by a quest for new knowledge for its own sake but was motivated by a
desire to better understand and solve the problems of industry.
In his
early career, he concentrated largely on uncovering new knowledge, but as he
did so, came across other, previously unforeseen questions. While working as a
chemist at the age of 22 he sought a theoretical understanding of why tartaric
acid crystals derived from bio-mass rotated the plane of polarised light while
the chemically synthesised form did not.
His
experiments revealed that the naturally occurring compound is chiral, meaning
its molecules exist in one of two possible crystal structures, each the mirror
image of the other. In the process of uncovering this new knowledge, he laid
the building blocks for the modern experimental science of crystallography,
which is today used in one form or another in everything from gemstone cutting
to DNA analysis.
Pasteur’s
remarkable career uncovered whole new branches of science – such as
microbiology – and, as he developed as a scientist, he began to seek to satisfy
both theoretical and practical goals.
Of
particular note is the fact that as the problems Pasteur chose to solve became
increasingly applied in nature, the nature of his research became more
fundamental. Pasteur’s research agenda was use-inspired. Understanding and
exploiting the dichotomy between applied and theoretical goals is perhaps the
reason behind the breadth of his contribution.
This
philosophy is instructive for modern policymakers seeking to get the most from
limited investment funds and move away from the outmoded, linear model. The
effective management of applied research operations is much more complicated
than simplistic models suggest.
A good
example of the dynamic nature of new knowledge acquisition and the interaction
between applied and fundamental goals is the former IRL’s (now Callaghan
Innovation) high-temperature
superconductivity (HTS) research programme, which has its roots in fundamental
research but has developed into an emerging New Zealand industry.
IRL’s
world-leading capabilities in both fundamental and applied HTS research have
positioned New Zealand as a key international player in an industry predicted
to be worth billions of dollars globally in the coming decades and transform
the way the world generates, uses and distributes electricity.
Ambitious
Dunedin-based firm Scott Technology, which purchased a controlling stake in IRL
spin-out HTS-110 , clearly understands the value of investing in technology.
Its approach is already paying dividends, judging by its inclusion in the
fast-mover list of the Technology Investment Network’s top
100 technology firms by revenue.
