{"id":160976,"date":"2024-06-26T23:01:51","date_gmt":"2024-06-26T20:01:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.vaikuttavuussaatio.fi\/?p=160976"},"modified":"2024-06-27T16:11:37","modified_gmt":"2024-06-27T13:11:37","slug":"towards-practice-inspired-basic-research","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.vaikuttavuussaatio.fi\/en\/towards-practice-inspired-basic-research\/","title":{"rendered":"Towards Practice-Inspired Basic Research"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The reality of research is more versatile than the often sharp division between basic and applied research suggests. Even the creation of entirely new scientific knowledge benefits from solving practical problems.<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The traditional view from the 1940s (e.g. Vannevar Bush<\/a>) suggests that new knowledge is created in basic research, which is then used to solve practical questions in applied research, followed by (product) development, and finally production. This description links research goals and outputs with specific process stages. Reality, however, is not that straightforward and simple.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research goals can be categorized based on whether they involve generating new fundamental knowledge or targeting specific usage (see: Donald Stokes<\/a>). This creates a four-quadrant model (Figure 1), where traditional basic research focuses on increasing understanding and applied research on solving problems. Examples of the former include Niels Bohr<\/strong> and the latter Thomas Edison<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n