A number of authors have recently proposed a future for science where the traditional academic mode of knowledge production, primarily organised on disciplinary lines, is largely replaced by a different mode of knowledge production that is more transient in its organisational forms.
If correct, the new mode of knowledge production has implications for the research cultures of universities, government research institutes, or industrial laboratories. But in particular, the trend has implications for research arrangements, such as Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs), because the CRCs seek to integrate, yet maintain, many of the characteristics of each sector that are likely to be significantly transformed by this new mode of knowledge production. Further, the CRCs themselves already reflect the salient characteristics proposed by this new mode of knowledge. It is therefore important to consider the impact that CRCs are having on the culture of science itself.
J. Lapidus, P. D. Syverson and S. R. Welch, ‘Postgraduate Research Training in the United States’, in S. Blume (ed.), Research Training, Present and Future, OECD, Paris, 1995.
T. Turpin, and S. Hill, Research Centres, World View, British Library.
See S. Garrett-Jones, T. Turpin, J. Bellavista and S. Hill, Using basic research—Assessing Connections between Basic Research and Socio-economic Objectives, Part 1 Review of Current theory and International Practices, NBEET, AGPS, Canberra, 1995, Commissioned Report No. 36.
Leydesdorff and H. Etzkowitz (eds), Universities in a Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations, Cassell, London, 1997.
John Ziman, Prometheus Bound: Science in a Dynamic Steady State, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1994, p. 7.
See M. Gibbons, C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scotland and M. Trow, The New Production of Knowledge: the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London, 1994.
S. Hill and T. Turpin, ‘Cultures in Collision: the Emergence of a New Localism in Academic Research’, in M. Strathern (ed.), The Uses of Knowledge: Global and Local Relations, Routledge, 1995.
Report of the CRC Program Evaluation Steering Committee, Changing Research Culture: Australia—1995, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1995.
John Ziman, ‘Postacademic Science’; Constructing Knowledge with Networks and Norms’ in Science Studies, 1, 1996, p. 75.
Ibid., p. 70.
These data are presented in more detail in a recent Australian APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) study. T. Turpin, D. Aylward, S. Garrett-Jones and R. Johnston, Knowledge Based Cooperation: University-Industry Linkages in Australia, Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra, 1996.
Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Selected Higher Education Finance and Research Expenditure Statistics, Higher Education Division, AGPS, Canberra, 1995.
S. Hill and T. Turpin, ‘The Formulation of Research Centres in the Australian University System’, Science and Technology Policy, 6, 5, pp. 7–13.
Report of the CRC Program Evaluation Steering Committee, Changing Research Culture: Australia— 1995, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1995, pp. 35–39.
See Ralph Slatyer in ‘Cooperative Research Centres: the Concept and its Implementation’, in F. Wood and L. Meek, Research Grants Management and Funding: Symposium Proceedings, Anutech, 1993, pp. 121–129.
M. Pitman and K. Boardman, ‘Research Centres—an Australian Perspective’, mimeo, Conference on Australian-American Cooperation on Knowledge Transfer at the Australia-New Zealand Studies Centre, Pennsylvania State University, 1993.
S. Liyanage and H. Mitchell, ‘Organisational Management in Australian Cooperative Research Centres’, in Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 5, 1, 1993, pp. 3–14.
Gibbons et al., op. cit., Ref. 6, p. 3.
Ibid., p. 17.
J. R. Grace, ‘Interdisciplinary Challenges and Successes from Canada's West Coast,’ paper presented to the Bieldefeld Conference on Interdisciplinary Research, Bieldefeld, 1995.
Ziman, op. cit., Ref. 9, p. 28.
Gibbons et al., op. cit., Ref. 6.
Adapted from Gibbons et al., op. cit., Ref. 6.
Trevor Pinch, ‘The Culture of Scientists and Disciplinary Rhetoric, in European Journal of Education, 25, 3, 1990, p. 300.
M. Ashmore, M. Mulkay and T. J. Pinch, ‘Definitional work in applied social science: collaborative analysis in health economics and sociology of science,’ in L. Hargens, R. A. Jones and A. Pickering (eds), Knowledge and Society: studies in the sociology of science past and present, vol. 8, JAI Press Greenwich, Conn., 1989, pp. 27–55.
Pinch, op. cit., Ref. 24, p. 299.
Report of the CRC Program Evaluation Steering Committee, op. cit., Ref. 8, p. 6.
Ibid., p. 9.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 11.
Ibid., p. 22.
Ibid., p. 27.
Ziman, op. cit., Ref. 9, p. 70.