I often say that the distinction between basic and applied research is a cold war concept, with reference to the first public moment in which this division was formalized, the “Science, The Endless Frontier” report by Vannevar Bush to president Truman, inspiring the creation of the NSF in the USA.

I am most attached to the concept of Pasteur’s quadrant, a type of research that aims to the understanding of the deep nature of the world and is inspired to the possible use of such knowledge.

It is a concept that we can easily grasp if we divide the research space in four quadrants, naming them with representative scientists, as in the figure taken from Donald Stokes’ book. Pasteur’s quadrant is different from Bohr’s quadrant (research aimed at fundamental understanding without consideration for use) and from Edison’s quadrant (research aimed at use and technology that does broaden our fundamental understanding of the world.

When we talk about basic and applied research with old categories we automatically fall into Bohr’s and Edison’s quadrants.

Also, public research policies tend to slip into Bohr’s or Edison’s quadrants, but I think that the key to prosperity and wellbeing is Pasteur. An effort has to be made, at least in the public debate and in the identification of key themes and sectors.