Definitions of R & D : report with evidence.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee.
Date:
1990
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Definitions of R & D : report with evidence. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    113/148 (page 111)
    Evidence from Fellows who contributed to this response suggests that the Frascati definitions of R&D are not used to any significant extent in the UK. In many cases adaptations have been developed which are believed to be more appropriate to particular industries and institutions. While most respondents from industrial background confirmed that the definition of R&D is not important to their organisations some Fellows from academic and other research institutions were concerned that simple figures for R&D spending, categorised according to Frascati or similar definitions, would not necessarily help policy makers to answer the question ‘‘How effective is R&D expenditure?”’. However, The Fellowship believes that the proposed survey questions are sufficiently detailed to prompt a wide-ranging response which will satisfy the Committee’s requirements. Fellows who contributed to this response also offered replies to the questions themselves, together with related comments. These are given overleaf. Response to Survey Questions I. Do you use the Frascati definitions in identifying R & D and differentiating it from other activities? If not, what definitions do you use? The Frascati definitions are generally acknowledged as the foundation upon which most Fellows build their own definitions of R & D. For that reason, and because of their usefulness in general discussion, the definitions command some respect. However, The Fellowship has little evidence to suggest that the Frascati definitions in their original form are currently being used. The Frascati definitions have some support from Fellows who believe that there is merit, for purposes of national and international comparison, in simplicity and freedom from confusing sub-division of categories. (Examples given are Strategic, Fundamental, Speculative, etc.). Those holding this view believe that the Frascati definitions, whatever their faults, offer the best route to an understanding by those in the policy making field and otherwise outside the immediate world of R & D. Support for the above view is, however, relatively small among Fellows. A majority of contributors to this response took issue with the details and interpretation of the definitions and those with an industrial background put forward a number of modifications which suit their own purposes. Three examples typify the variety of response: The first, from a national utility company, employs definitions derived by Irvine and Martin (see Appendix A) from diverse sources, including Frascati. The most notable point in this case is the identification of ‘strategic’ research as an element of basic research. The second example, from a national mature industry, provides the following definitions which suit the industry concerned: Basic Research—‘Experimental or theoretical work undertaken to acquire new knowledge and a basic understanding of scientific phenomena and observable facts whether or not there is a particular application or use in view’’. Experimental Development—“‘Laboratory and pilot plant based experimental, theoretical and scientific work undertaken to improve the technical and economic performance of commercial operations’’. Applied Research—“‘Research associated with the on-plant introduction of new materials, products or devices and the development of production scale processes, systems and services’. In these definitions Basic Research encompasses all basic research, contrary to Frascati. Experimental Research means Laboratory and pilot plant based process and product research work. Applied Research entails the applications of technology. The third example to be proposed is from a Fellow employed by a large manufacturer of many diverse products. His organisation defines Basic Research as gaining knowledge for its own sake. Strategic Research is ‘the search for knowledge in an area perceived to be of strategic interest to the company’. Aimed Research is knowledge directed towards a device, process or material which has interest to the company. Development is defined as in the Frascati definition for Experimental Development—the difference being that the word ‘experimental’ is considered inapposite. In the foregoing definitions Strategic and Aimed Research constitute Applied Research. It is evident from these few examples that important differences exist in currently-used definitions for R & D and it cannot be said that The Fellowship is able to put forward a unanimous view. It is however, notable, that strategic research is believed to be an important addition to the Frascati definitions. Finally, a further example is provided by a Fellow whose company is heavily committed to both Civil and Defence R & D. His organisation employs three separate sources of R & D definitions: 1. Those used by the MoD. 2. Those used by the UK accountancy profession (SSAP 13). 3. Company definitions based on (1) and (2) but providing more detailed guidance.