IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_12235.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Science by Consensus: Eliciting Citizens’ and Experts’ R&D Spending Priorities

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Capozza
  • Krishna Srinivasan
  • Mattie Toma

Abstract

Research and development (R&D) is thought to be an important determinant of improvements in living standards, health, and economic security. Yet, U.S. government spending on R&D has fallen over time, with further cuts proposed. Two standard rationalizations for such cuts are: (i) citizens support such cuts, and (ii) the marginal social return from R&D is low. We test these using surveys with U.S. citizens and experts. Our evidence rejects both: a large majority of citizens do not favor cuts and, on the contrary, prefer increasing R&D spending; and a large majority of experts judge the marginal social returns from increasing R&D spending to be high, with the average belief placing benefits at about $3 per dollar invested. Experts underestimate public support, indicating that they misperceive the political feasibility of increasing R&D spending.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Capozza & Krishna Srinivasan & Mattie Toma, 2025. "Science by Consensus: Eliciting Citizens’ and Experts’ R&D Spending Priorities," CESifo Working Paper Series 12235, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp12235.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Stefanie Stantcheva & Johannes Wohlfart, 2025. "Understanding Economic Behavior Using Open-Ended Survey Data," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1244-1280, December.
    2. Peter Diamond & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "The Case for a Progressive Tax: From Basic Research to Policy Recommendations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 165-190, Fall.
    3. Peter Andrebriq & Carlo Pizzinelli & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2022. "Subjective Models of the Macroeconomy: Evidence From Experts and Representative Samples," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(6), pages 2958-2991.
    4. Jonas Hjort & Diana Moreira & Gautam Rao & Juan Francisco Santini, 2021. "How Research Affects Policy: Experimental Evidence from 2,150 Brazilian Municipalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(5), pages 1442-1480, May.
    5. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    6. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    7. Mokyr, Joel, 1990. "Punctuated Equilibria and Technological Progress," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 350-354, May.
    8. Simon Jäger & Christopher Roth & Nina Roussille & Benjamin Schoefer, 2024. "Worker Beliefs About Outside Options," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 139(3), pages 1505-1556.
    9. Kyle R. Myers & Lauren Lanahan, 2022. "Estimating Spillovers from Publicly Funded R&D: Evidence from the US Department of Energy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(7), pages 2393-2423, July.
    10. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    11. Toma, Mattie & Bell, Elizabeth, 2024. "Understanding and increasing policymakers’ sensitivity to program impact," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    12. Nicholas Bloom & Mark Schankerman & John Van Reenen, 2013. "Identifying Technology Spillovers and Product Market Rivalry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(4), pages 1347-1393, July.
    13. Tania Babina & Alex Xi He & Sabrina T Howell & Elisabeth Ruth Perlman & Joseph Staudt, 2023. "Cutting the Innovation Engine: How Federal Funding Shocks Affect University Patenting, Entrepreneurship, and Publications," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 895-954.
    14. David Cutler & Angus Deaton & Adriana Lleras-Muney, 2006. "The Determinants of Mortality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(3), pages 97-120, Summer.
    15. Alston, Julian M. & Chan-Kang, Connie & Marra, Michele C. & Pardey, Philip G. & Wyatt, T. J., 2000. "A meta-analysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem?," Research reports 113, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S Graff Zivin & Danielle Li & Bhaven N Sampat, 2019. "Public R&D Investments and Private-sector Patenting: Evidence from NIH Funding Rules," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 117-152.
    17. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    18. Felix Chopra & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Andreas Stegmann, 2024. "The Null Result Penalty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(657), pages 193-219.
    19. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    20. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer & Andreas Peichl, 2021. "Politically Feasible Reforms of Nonlinear Tax Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 153-191, January.
    21. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    22. Broockman, David E. & Skovron, Christopher, 2018. "Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(3), pages 542-563, August.
    23. Vivalt, Eva & Coville, Aidan, 2023. "How do policymakers update their beliefs?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    24. Edwin Mansfield & John Rapoport & Anthony Romeo & Samuel Wagner & George Beardsley, 1977. "Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(2), pages 221-240.
    25. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    26. Erzo F. P. Luttmer & Andrew A. Samwick, 2018. "The Welfare Cost of Perceived Policy Uncertainty: Evidence from Social Security," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 275-307, February.
    27. Björn Bartling & Krishna Srinivasan, 2025. "Paternalistic interventions: determinants of demand and supply," ECON - Working Papers 469, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    28. Julio J. Elías & Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis, 2019. "Paying for Kidneys? A Randomized Survey and Choice Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2855-2888, August.
    29. Björn Bartling & Krishna Srinivasan, 2025. "Paternalistic Interventions: Determinants of Demand and Supply," CESifo Working Paper Series 11886, CESifo.
    30. Thaler, Richard, 1981. "Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 201-207.
    31. Nathaniel Hendren & Ben Sprung-Keyser, 2020. "A Unified Welfare Analysis of Government Policies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1209-1318.
    32. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    33. Stefano Carattini & Robert Dur & John List, 2024. "Policy evaluation and the causal analysis of public support," Natural Field Experiments 00798, The Field Experiments Website.
    34. Viktoria Cologna & Niels G. Mede & Sebastian Berger & John Besley & Cameron Brick & Marina Joubert & Edward W. Maibach & Sabina Mihelj & Naomi Oreskes & Mike S. Schäfer & Sander Linden & Nor Izzatina , 2025. "Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(4), pages 713-730, April.
    35. Luis Sanz-Menéndez & Gregg G. Van Ryzin & Eloisa del Pino, 2014. "Citizens’ support for government spending on science and technology," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 611-624.
    36. Jeff Tollefson & Dan Garisto & Heidi Ledford, 2025. "Will US science survive Trump 2.0?," Nature, Nature, vol. 641(8061), pages 26-30, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    2. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Durlauf, Steven N. & Quah, Danny T., 1999. "The new empirics of economic growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 235-308, Elsevier.
    4. Blesse, Sebastian & Gruendler, Klaus & Heil, Philipp & Hermes, Henning, 2025. "The demand for economic narratives," ZEW Discussion Papers 25-054, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    6. Godin, Benoit, 2004. "The New Economy: what the concept owes to the OECD," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 679-690, July.
    7. Theresa Gullo & Benjamin Page & David Weiner & Heidi L. Williams, 2024. "Estimating the Economic and Budgetary Effects of Research Investments," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 39, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Kemnitz, Alexander & Knoblach, Michael, 2020. "Endogenous sigma-augmenting technological change: An R&D-based approach," CEPIE Working Papers 02/20, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).
    9. Parteka, Aleksandra & Kordalska, Aleksandra, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and productivity: global evidence from AI patent and bibliometric data," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    10. Brian Lucking & Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2018. "Have R&D Spillovers Changed?," NBER Working Papers 24622, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Benjamin Montmartin & Ludovic Dibiaggio & Lionel Nesta, 2018. "Regional Alignment and Productivity Growth," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) halshs-01948337, HAL.
    12. Jones, C.I., 2016. "The Facts of Economic Growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 3-69, Elsevier.
    13. Kuhn, Michael & Prettner, Klaus, 2016. "Growth and welfare effects of health care in knowledge-based economies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-119.
    14. Callaghan, Christian William, 2021. "Growth contributions of technological change: Is there a burden of knowledge effect?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    15. Burgi, Constantin & Gorgulu, Nisan, 2021. "The Impact of the Spatial Population Distribution on Economic Growth," Working Papers 17-2021, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    16. Alpino, Matteo & Asatryan, Zareh & Blesse, Sebastian & Wehrhöfer, Nils, 2022. "Austerity and distributional policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 112-127.
    17. Constantin Bürgi & Nisan Gorgulu, 2022. "The Impact of the Spatial Population Distribution on Economic Growth: Evidence from the United States," CESifo Working Paper Series 10008, CESifo.
    18. Boumans, Dorine & Gründler, Klaus & Potrafke, Niklas & Ruthardt, Fabian, 2024. "Political leaders and macroeconomic expectations: Evidence from a global survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    19. Guglielmo Briscese & John List, 2024. "Toward an Understanding of the Political Economy of Using Field Experiments in Policymaking," Natural Field Experiments 00799, The Field Experiments Website.
    20. Roberto Veneziani & Luca Zamparelli & Daniele Tavani & Luca Zamparelli, 2017. "Endogenous Technical Change In Alternative Theories Of Growth And Distribution," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 1272-1303, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.