Summary
Research councils began as channels for state patronage of science (a widespread phenomenon after World War II) and were captured by the scientists: peer review of proposals, panels, board membership. In this way, they became an important organ of the ‘Republic of Science’ (Michael Polanyi's concept). Being awarded a grant is now as important for the reputation or status of a scientist as the money value per se: research councils have become part of the reward system of science. Credibility-cycle analysis (Latour and Woolgar) is used to show this; and then applied to the research council itself, between the State and the national scientific community. Current concerns about proposal success rates and conservatism are analysed in terms of dynamics of this research world. This sociological approach to research councils allows analysis of changes in the reward system of science (where ‘relevance’ is becoming an accepted criterion world-wide) and of the complex environment of research councils, where many actors now compete for the intermediary role. Research councils must also become entrepreneurial-or become obsolete.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Abrams, P.A. (1991). ‘The predictive ability of peer review of grant proposals: The case of ecology and the US National Science Foundation’,Social Studies of Science 21, 111–132.
Brickman, R. and Rip, A. (1979). ‘Science policy advisory councils in France, The Netherlands and the United States, 1957–1977: A comparative analysis;Social Studies of Science 9, 167–198.
Brooks, H. (1971). ‘Thoughts on graduate education’,The Graduate Journal 8(2), 319–336.
Bud, R.F. (1978). ‘Strategy in American cancer research after World War II: A case study’,Social Studies of Science 8, 425–459.
Bush, V. (1945).Science, The Endless Frontier. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office (reprinted 1990).
Chubin, D.E. (1990). ‘Analyzing basic research goals for the U.S. Congress’, in Cozzens, S.E. et al. (eds.),The Research System In Transition. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 295–321.
Chubin, D.E. and Hackett, E.J. (1990).Peerless Science. Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy. Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press.
Elzinga, A. (1985). ‘Research bureaucracy and the drift of epistemic Criteria’, in Wittrock, B. and Elzinga A. (eds.),The University Research System. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International, pp. 191–220.
Greenberg, D.S. (1966). ‘Grant Swinger: Reflections on six years of progress’,Science 154, 1424–1425.
Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979).Laboratory Life. The Social Construction of Scientific Fact. Beverly Hills and London: Sage.
Myers, G. (1985). ‘The social construction of two biologists' proposals’,Written Communication 2(3), 219–245.
OECD/DSTI. (1992). ‘Autonomies and interdependencies in science policies. The changing role of research councils’,Draft Proceedings of the Meeting of Heads of Research Councils of OECD Countries. CNRS, Paris, 14 and 15 October 1991. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry.
Polanyi, M. (1962). ‘The Republic of Science. Its political and economic theory’,Minerva 1 (Autumn), 54–73. Reprinted in Shils (1968), pp. 1–20.
Polanyi, M. (1963). ‘The potential theory of adsorption. Authority in science has its uses and its dangers’,Science 141, 1010–1013.
Price, D.K. (1978). ‘Endless frontier or bureaucratic morass?’Daedalus Spring, 75–92.
Rip, A. (1985). ‘Commentary: Peer review is alive and well in the United States’,Science, Technology & Human Values 10(3) (Summer), 82–86.
Rip, A. (1987a). ‘The challenges to science policy studies’,Metascience 5 3–10.
Rip, A. (1987b). ‘Strategische sturring van wetenschap: noodzaak en (on)mogelijkheden’ in Bijleveld R.J. and van Vught, F.A. (eds.),Sturring van het Hoger Onderwijs. s-Gravenhage: Vuga, pp. 39–59.
Rip, A. (1988). ‘Contextual transformations in contemporary science’, in Jamison A. (ed.),Keeping Science Straight. Gothenburg: Department of Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, pp. 59–87.
Rip, A. (1990). ‘An exercise in foresight: The research system in transition to what?’ in Cozzens S.E. et al. (eds.),The Research System In Transition. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 387–401.
Shils, E. (ed.) (1968).Criteria for Scientific Development: Public Policy and National Goals. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press. A Selection of Articles fromMinerva.
Smith, B.L. (1990).American Science Policy Since World War II. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Stokes, Terry (1993). ‘The ARC at five: A view from the inside’, Paper presented at theInternational Symposium on Grant-Giving and Grant-Management Procedures and Processes in Comparative Perspective, Canberra, 25–26 July.
Van der Meulen, B. (1992). ‘Evaluation processes in science. The construction of quality by science, government and industry’. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Twente.
Van der Meulen, B.J.R. and Rip, A. (1992)Beoordelen van universitair technisch wetenschappelijk onderzoek. 's-Gravenhage: Sdu Grafische Bedrijven. Achtergrondstudies Hoger Onderwijs en Wetenschappelijk onderzoek 11.
Van der Meulen, B.J.R., Westerheijden, D.F., Rip, A. and Van Vught, F.A. (1991).Verkenningscommissies tussen Veld en Overheid. Evaluatie-onderzoek Verkenningscommissies. Den Haag: Staatsuitgeverij. Achtergrondstudies Hoger Onderwijs en Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 8.
Williamson, D. (1992). ‘Summary of the discussion: Relations with other research institutions and the scientific community’, in OECD/DSTI,Draft Proceedings of the Meeting of Heads of Research Councils of OECD Countries. CNRS, Paris, 14 and 15 October 1991. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry, pp. 31–32.
Wood, F.Q., Meek, V.L. and Harman, G. (1992). ‘The research grant application process. Learning from failure?’Higher Education 24, 1–23.
Ziman, J.S. (1983) ‘The collectivization of science’,Proc. Royal Society B 219, 1–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rip, A. The republic of science in the 1990s. High Educ 28, 3–23 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383569
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383569