Pasteur’s Quadrant

Some years ago, Stokes (Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.) observed that Pasteur made his fundamental contributions to microbiology by focusing on the mechanisms of diseases like anthrax, rabies, and cholera. In short, “use-inspired” basic research yielded both applied and theoretical results, both solutions to specific pressing real-world problems and generalizable knowledge.

At Georgetown our students, staff, and faculty seek to use their talents to solve pressing world problems. There are many potential problems to choose from. The globe faces existential danger from the loss of biodiversity, disease threats from unprecedented interactions between human and nonhuman species, climate changes that portend drought conditions preventing agricultural sustainability, disastrous weather events destroy whole swaths of areas.

In addition, in many countries of the world, increasing inequality in wealth and income is exacerbating suffering from poverty, food insecurity, unstable housing, etc. These inequalities are associated with racial and ethnic injustices that limit access to the goods of the society.

All of this is happening at a time when the internet offers magnification of voices of dissent but also voices of hatred and deception. In many societies, trust in democratic institutions has sunken to all time low levels. Perceived isolation of many leads to erosion of the sense of community. The appeal of nondemocratic governance grows among large segments of many countries’ populaces.

In short, every unsolved problem in the world appears to create disproportionate suffering among the poor, the disadvantaged, those at the margins of their societies. The values ascribed to Georgetown — “people for others,” “care for our common home,” “community in diversity,” “contemplation in action” — can guide decisions for how a university might contribute to the common good in such circumstances.

In the context of a university, there is one common attribute of the world problems listed above: no one academic discipline has the knowledge required to solve the problem. Each is embedded in a complicated mix of systems of interacting entities from the cellular level to the societal to the global. Human behavior appears to be feature of every problem. Emotions underlie the human role.

For universities to contribute to the solutions to such problems, therefore, new collaborations across fields are necessary. However, even with representatives from multiple fields being completely willing to work together, the challenges to the collaboration are real. Concepts from one field need to be communicated to another; alternative perspectives on the problem need to be understood by all. This is not work for the incurious.

So, how can universities organize to liberate faculty who want to tackle these problems? First is acknowledgement that the arts, humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences all have relevancy to addressing the world problems. Human behavior can be changed by powerful images and stories that allow individuals to relate to global issues. The humanities are desperately needed. But from human cognition, to decision-making under uncertainty, to understanding social movements, the social sciences must offer guidance on human behavior. The natural sciences can identify the physical properties of the world and mechanisms of change, and build tools to ameliorate the problems.

Second, universities need spaces that permit the problem-focused work to take place. These need to be welcoming environments where students and faculty interested in the problem have the time and supports to exchange their languages, concepts, and perspectives on the problem at hand. Those in these spaces would subordinate their allegiance to their field or discipline to a focus on the problem. “Use-inspired” basic research would inevitably result.

Third, the reward systems for students and faculty need to value these problem-oriented endeavors. For students, their progress to degree should  be enhanced by working on such problems. For faculty, their scholarly contributions to these problems need to be rewarded.

Fourth, the traditional fields and disciplines will remain the generators of much generalizable insight, knowledge, and basic development. Interdisciplinary research requires strong disciplines.

The world needs universities at this moment in history more than it may realize. Those of us inside them have obligations to serve those needs.