If science is a public good, why do scientists own it?

Authors

  • Steve Fuller University of Warwick

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202057454

Keywords:

science, public good, NSF, DARPA, organized hypocrisy, peer review

Abstract

I argue that if science is to be a public good, it must be made one. Neither science nor any other form of knowledge is naturally a public good. And given the history of science policy in the twentieth century, it would be reasonable to conclude that science is in fact what economists call a ‘club good’. I discuss this matter in detail in two contexts: (1) current UK efforts to create a version of the US DARPA that would focus on projects of larger, long-term societal interests – i.e. beyond the interests of the academic specialities represented in, say, the US NSF; (2) what I call the ‘organized hypocrisy’ involved in presenting science as a public good through the so-called ‘peer review’ process.

Downloads

Published

2021-01-22

How to Cite

[1]
2021. If science is a public good, why do scientists own it?. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 57, 4 (Jan. 2021), 23–39. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202057454.