Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Endogenous Growth Theory for natural scientists

Nature Medicine volume 4, pages 995–999 (1998)Cite this article

Abstract

Increased state funding in all sectors of research is now being advocated in the name of a new economic theory called Endogenous Growth Theory (EGT). Here, Terence Kealey and Aram Rudenski (Cambridge University, UK) argue that this new model of scientific funding, devised by Stanford economist Paul Romer in 1990, is inherently flawed--as was the model before it--and will not lead to economic prosperity as governments hope.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: USA GDP per capita and federal expenditure based on science.
Figure 2: GDP and relative citation rates.
Figure 3: GDPs percapita USA, Canada and Switzerland.

References

  1. Kealey, T. in The Economic Laws of Scientific Research (Macmillan, London, 1996).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Kealey, T. Why science is endogenous. Research Policy 26, 897–923 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Solow, R.M. A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Q. J. Econ. 70, 65–94 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Swan, T.W. Economic growth and capital accumulation. Economic Record 32, 334–361 (1956).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arrow, K.J. The economic implications of learning-by-doing. Rev. Economic Studies 29, 155–173 ( 1962).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Romer, P.M. Endogenous technical change. J. Political Economy 98 , S71–S102 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Aghion, P. & Howitt, P. A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60, 323– 351 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The views expressed here are strictly our own, yet we thank D. Edgerton, H. Kaminga, F. Kelly, D. Klein, T. Lee and C. Rowatt for discussions on the economics, philosophy and mathematics of science and its funding. T.K. thanks F. Miller, J. Paul and E. Paul for their hospitality.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Biochemistry Cambridge University, Box 232 Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, CB2 2QR, UK

    Terence Kealey & Aram Rudenski

Authors
  1. Terence Kealey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aram Rudenski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kealey, T., Rudenski, A. Endogenous Growth Theory for natural scientists. Nat Med 4, 995–999 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/1982

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/1982

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing