In the recent years, whether public sectors or private ones should be responsible for the advancement of sciences has sparked a heated debate. While some people argue that the former should be in charge of the task, other people object to the argument. I personally believe, however, that it would depend on the discipline.
On the one hand, it is preferable that governments take responsibility for the improvement of some specific scientific fields like humanities. It is difficult for such fields to gain research funds from commercial organisations because these fields hardly deliver financial benefit. In Japan, for example, the number of research funds established by private sectors for humanities is far less than the one for natural sciences. If public sectors as represented by governments do not financially aid to these disciplines, they will perish sooner or later. Indeed, in some countries, it is reported that the number of faculty of humanities is especially decreasing compared to the other faculties because of the shortage of funds.
On the other hand, commercial organisations should be responsible for the development of their relevant practical sciences. These organisations usually enjoy some sort of benefit from the disciplines in one way or another; technology and knowledge as the research outcomes of these fields are indispensable for the prosperity of private companies. One of the best examples of this is pharmaceutical industry. Today, most part of their profit heavily relies upon drug discovery efforts conducted by pharmaceutical colleges around the world. Therefore, it is very natural that private sectors provide research budgets for practical sciences. This is also evidenced in a today’s movement in which a number of enterprises are embarking on financial backing for their related fields as a kind of pro bono activities.
In conclusion, the answer to the question whether governments or commercial organisations are responsible for scientific researches would be contingent on the scientific field.
In the recent years, whether public
sectors
or
private
ones should be responsible for the advancement of
sciences
has sparked a heated debate. While
some
people
argue that the former should be in charge of the task, other
people
object to the argument. I
personally
believe,
however
, that it would depend on the discipline.
On the one hand, it is preferable that
governments
take responsibility for the improvement of
some
specific scientific
fields
like humanities. It is difficult for such
fields
to gain
research
funds from commercial
organisations
because
these
fields
hardly deliver financial benefit. In Japan,
for example
, the number of
research
funds established by
private
sectors
for humanities is far less than the one for natural
sciences
. If public
sectors
as represented by
governments
do not
financially
aid to these disciplines, they will perish sooner or later.
Indeed
, in
some
countries, it
is reported
that the number of faculty of humanities is
especially
decreasing compared to the other faculties
because
of the shortage of funds.
On the other hand
, commercial
organisations
should be responsible for the development of their relevant practical
sciences
. These
organisations
usually
enjoy
some
sort of benefit from the disciplines in one way or another; technology and knowledge as the
research
outcomes of these
fields
are indispensable for the prosperity of
private
companies
. One of the best examples of this is pharmaceutical industry.
Today
, most part of their profit
heavily
relies upon drug discovery efforts conducted by pharmaceutical colleges around the world.
Therefore
, it is
very
natural that
private
sectors
provide
research
budgets for practical
sciences
. This is
also
evidenced in a
today
’s movement in which a number of enterprises are embarking on financial backing for their related
fields
as a kind of pro bono activities.
In conclusion
, the answer to
the question whether
governments
or commercial
organisations
are responsible for scientific
researches
would be contingent on the scientific
field
.