Nature:
Although it has long been assumed that the US favors applied
over basic science, the opposite turns out to be true, writes
Daniel Sarewitz for
Nature. Over the past 15 years, agencies that serve
public goals rather than advance science—the US
Geological Survey, for example—have experienced minimal
budgetary growth. Yet, over the same period, government funding
for research doubled, with most of that money going to the
National Institutes of Health and NSF. Sarewitz claims the
funding allocation may be because advocacy for research funding
comes mostly from the high-prestige frontiers of science and
the institutions associated with such research. Nevertheless,
addressing social problems, such as preventing and preparing
for natural disasters, is just as important. To ensure that the
scientific enterprise continues to meet challenges to public
well-being, he says, science advocacy should seek a balance
between the fundamental-science agencies and the mission
agencies that link science to the public good.
