Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In develop

Vannevar Bush, who had originated the original United States science program, greatly emphasized the importance of basic research for national competitiveness, innovation and security. Many discoveries and important innovations would not have occurred if it were not for the formal government support, like the scientific program mentioned above that still persists even today. Henceforth, the mid-20th century, till today generated many increases in patents filed, these are important scientific advances which materially improved the lives of many people. However, in the interest of scientific research, there needs to be government curbs on probable espionage, cyber threats and other potential infringement. Moreover, researchers and inventors also need to take their own precaution pertaining to various external threats. Governments need to play a tentative balancing act between placing various restrictions but also facilitating research and development; these state actors need to prioritize issues and stakeholder groups which are affected by research activity.

Following from above, restrictions create an atmosphere, especially over the longer term, of curbs on scientific freedoms. Using Edward Teller’s foresight, he had said that today’s science is tomorrow’s technologies. Different laws and policies pertaining to stringent security requirements- cyber security laws or anti-espionage policies can hinder information sharing between researchers. If there are limitations on academic and scientific freedoms, it encumbers the entire scientific process of creating new knowledge. Consider for example, a new virus strain which emerges in a wet market somewhere in Asia Pacific: Asian epidemiologists were quick to share the virus genome sequence on some online database. But, a particular economically powerful country decides to restrict its’ virologists from accessing this genome, or even interacting with Cambodian virologists. So, vaccine research cannot continue, novel technologies only remain within the labs and scientific progress is thwarted. A disservice is committed on people of both Asia Pacific and this particular country, just as much harm done on scientific research and future inquiry.

But, a dispassionate and disinterested observer can also analyze government restrictions differently. If there is a broader convergence of pertinent state policies with university and scientific institutes, perhaps scientific research can continue without much interruption. Take for example, European data privacy laws and its impacts on businesses; existing large and small technology startups change their business models for which the consumer benefits. The giant strides towards a single metaverse, that requires continuously innovating new virtual experiences based on consumer and business data. Such laws create a more equal and a fairer level-playing field for businesses and consumers- by protecting consumer data from leaks, businesses, that have their own respective policies aided along with specific government data protection laws often create customized consumer experiences with personalized avatars, unique immersive virtual stores and interactions, etc.

Expressing another point, another idea which is germane to the above statement, is one of scientific discovery. Post it notes were a serendipitous discovery by 3m scientists, originally conceived as bookmarks. The scientists were actually working on something else with the particular adhesive. So, how do we know what leads to accidental discoveries? Is it a novel creation, an iteration on a previous idea, serendipity or combination of different policies? Perhaps, governments need to find some tentative balance between imposing restrictions and encouraging greater freedoms for research. Increasing the earmarked funds for basic research could counterbalance policy restrictions, thereby facilitating scientific inquiry. Or perhaps, the peer review process could be improved upon for which scientific discussions can increase productive scientific output.

To conclude, fewer restrictions is often associated with greater scientific and academic freedoms and perhaps greater scientific research output. However, governments need to tentatively balance different considerations, more so, as cyber threats, corporate espionage,data leaks and national security issues proliferate. Some restrictions, along with monitoring and oversight which combines personal and institutional responsibility that could potentially increase scientific output which also maintains the necessary freedoms for such inquiry.