IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

From Keeping 'Nature's Secrets' to the Institutionalization of 'Open Science'


  • Paul A. David


March 2001 “Open science" as a practise became increasing widespread in Europe during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. It represented a departure from the previously dominant ethos of secrecy in the pursuit of Nature’s Secrets, and its emergence was a distinctive and vital organizational aspect of the Scientific Revolution. The development of norms of disclosure and demonstration, and the rise of “cooperative rivalries” in the revelation of new knowledge, constituted a functional response to heightened asymmetric information problems that had been posed for the Renaissance system of court-patronage of the arts and sciences. Pre-existing informational asymmetries had been exaccerbated by the claims of mathematicians and the increasing practical reliance upon new mathematical techniques in a variety of “contexts of application.” In late Renaissance Europe, the feudal legacy of fragmented political authority had resulted in relations between noble patrons and their savant-clients that resembled the situation modern economists describe as "common agency contracting in substitutes" -- competititon among incompletely informed principals for the dedicated services of multiple agents. These conditions not only induced the formation of mechanisms enabling would?be clients to build public reputations for scientific expertise and credibility, but also tended to result in more favorable contract terms (especially with regard to autonomy and financial support) for the agent?client members of western Europe's nascent scientific communities. Foundations were thus laid for the later seventeenth and eighteenth century institutionalization of the open pursuit of scientific knowledge under the auspices of State-sponsored academies. Rather than being a novel departure induced by the needs of the new style of inquiry, those institutional developments continued a broader intellectual and cultural movement that had been underway in Europe outside the medieval universities. This had manifested itself in the formation of myriad academies that were the precursor form of the private scientific societies that appeared under elite patronage early in the seventeenth century. The ethos and norms of disclosure, and the characteristic supporting institutions of modern, publicly funded open scientific research are, in an important sense, independent historical legacies; they were not derivative from the epistemological aspects of the Scientific Revolution, although to a considerable degree they have been responsible for the successes that “the scientific method” has achieved in the production of reliable knowledge. The fragility of these cooperative features of “the R&D infrastructure” needs to be keep in mind by science policy makers. Working Papers Index

Suggested Citation

  • Paul A. David, 2001. "From Keeping 'Nature's Secrets' to the Institutionalization of 'Open Science'," Working Papers 01006, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:stanec:01006

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters,in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    3. Lecuyer, Chrisotphe, 1998. "Academic Science and Technology in the Service of Industry: MIT Creates a "Permeable" Engineering School," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 28-33, May.
    4. Dasgupta, Partha & David, Paul, 1985. "Information Disclosure and the Economics of Science and Technology," CEPR Discussion Papers 73, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    2. Regina Grafe & Camilla Brautaset, 2006. "The Quiet Transport Revolution: Returns to Scale, Scope and Network Density in Norway`s Nineteenth-Century Sailing Fleet," Economics Series Working Papers 2006-W62, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    3. Paul A. David & Louise C. Keely, 2003. "The Economics of Scientific Research Coalitions: Collaborative Network Formation in the Presence of Multiple Funding Agencies," Chapters,in: Science and Innovation, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Guillaume Daudin, 2008. "Domestic Trade and Market Size in Late Eighteenth-Century France," Economics Series Working Papers 69, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    5. J.Humphries & T. Leunig, 2007. "Cities, Market Integration and Going to Sea: Stunting and the standard of living in early nineteenth-century England and Wales," Oxford University Economic and Social History Series _066, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    6. Mohammad Niaz Asadullah, 2006. "Educational Disparity in East and West Pakistan, 1947–71: Was East Pakistan Discriminated Against?," Oxford University Economic and Social History Series _063, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    7. repec:oxf:wpaper:69.2 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jeffrey L. Furman & Scott Stern, 2006. "Climbing Atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research," NBER Working Papers 12523, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production
    • N0 - Economic History - - General
    • P0 - Economic Systems - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:wop:stanec:01006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.