Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inventions, patents and commercial development from governmentally financed research in Great Britain: The origins of the National Research Development Corporation

  • Published:
Minerva Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. The Development of Inventions Act 1948. The provisions of this Act have been amended and consolidated by the Development of Inventions Acts: 1954, 1958, 1965 and 1967.

  2. Ibid. The Development of Inventions Act 1948. The provisions of this Act have been amended and consolidated by the Development of Inventions Acts: 1954, 1958, 1965 and 1967.

  3. Marwick, Arthur,The Deluge (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1967), pp. 244–258. For a more detailed account of the shortage of optical glass see MacLeod, R. M. and Andrews, G. Kay, “War and Economic Development: Government and the Optical Industry in Britain, 1914–18” in Winter, J. (ed.),War and Economic Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974) pp. 165–203. On the shortages of synthetic organic chemicals see Haber, L. F., “Government Intervention at the Frontiers of Science: British Dyestuffs and Synthetic Organic Chemicals 1914–39”,Minerva., XI (January, 1973), pp. 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Haber, L. F.,.

    Google Scholar 

  5. For an account of the movement for the endowment of science see MacLeod, Roy. M., “The Support of Victorian Science: The Endowment of Research Movement in Great Britain, 1868–1900”,Minerva, IX (April 1971), pp. 197–230.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Moseley, Russell, “The Origins and Early Years of The National Physical Laboratory: A Chapter in the Pre-history of British Science Policy”,Minerva, XVI (Summer 1978), pp. 222–250.

    Google Scholar 

  7. , 222.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Plans were outlined in a white paper published on 23 July, 1915, entitled,A Scheme for the Organisation and Development of Scientific and Industrial Research, Cd. 8005 (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1915). This scheme formed the basis for a new government department, the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. The events leading up to this, particularly the important role of scientists are described in Varcoe, Ian, “Scientists, Government and Organised Research: The Early History of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, 1914–1916”,Minerva, VIII (April 1970), pp. 192–216. For an account which examines in more detail the role of politicians and civil servants in this episode see MacLeod, R. M. and Andrews, E. K., “The Origins of the DSIR: Reflections on Ideas and Men 1915–1916”,Public Administration, XLVIII (Spring 1970), pp. 23–48.

  9. MacLeod, R. M. and Andrews, E. K., (Spring 1970), pp. 36–39; MacLeod, R. M., “Science and the Treasury: Principles, Personalities and Policies, 1870–85”, in Turner, G. (ed.),The Patronage of Science in the Nineteenth Century (Leyden: Noordhoff, 1976), pp. 115–172; Moseley, Russell, “The Origins and Early Years of the National Physical Laboratory ...”, and Moseley, Russell, “Government Science and the Royal Society: The Control of the National Physical Laboratory in the Inter-War Years”,Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, XXXV (1980), pp. 167–193.

    Google Scholar 

  10. It was referred to by a Treasury official as “this half-baked (or quarter-baked) scheme”; See MacLeod, R. M., and Andrews, E. K.,, p. 36.

    Google Scholar 

  11. . This point is emphasised by Varcoe, Ian,op. cit. “Scientists, Government and Organised Research: The Early History of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, 1914–1916”,Minerva, VIII (April 1970), pp. 192–216.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A typical view was provided by G. E. Kenneth Mees, a British subject, director of the Eastman Kodak Research Laboratory at Rochester, New York, in his pioneering bookThe Organization of Industrial Scientific Research (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1920), p. 14. According to Mees “The tendency of work done under Government control is to be too academic, needlessly expensive, and insufficiently in contact with the practical conditions of industrial life.”

  13. Hutchinson, Eric, “Scientists and Civil Servants: The Struggle over the National Physical Laboratory in 1918”,Minerva, VII (Spring 1969), pp. 373–398.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Public Record Office, File 17/184. DSIR, memorandum, “Patents: Special Committee on Patents and Profits” (1915).

  15. Ibid. Public Record Office, File 17/184. DSIR, memorandum, “Patents: Special Committee on Patents and Profits” (1915).

  16. Ibid. Public Record Office, File 17/184. DSIR, memorandum, “Patents: Speical Committee on Patents and Profits” (1915).

  17. Ibid. Public Record Office, File 17/184. DSIR, memorandum, “Patents: Special Committee on Patents and Profits” (1915).

  18. Public Record Office, File 17/185, DSIR, Memorandum, “Draft of First Memorandum-Considered at Extra-Ordinary Meeting of Council” (10 March, 1916). This file contains numerous further drafts including the final submission to the special committee.

  19. Public Record Office, File 17/184, DSIR,Report of the Special Committee (26 July, 1916). The special committee had in addition produced an interim report devoted to the particular problems of patent policy entailed in the government's support for the optical glass industry.

  20. Ibid. Public Record Office, File 17/184, DSIR,Report of the Special Committee (26 July, 1916). The speical committee had in addition produced an interim report devoted to the particular problems of patent policy entailed in the government's support for the optical glass industry.

  21. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for the Year 1916–17 Cd. 8718 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1917).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ministry of Reconstruction,Report of the Machinery of Government Committee, Cd. 9230 (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1918). The relevant section of the report is Chapter IV, “Research and Information”.

    Google Scholar 

  23. For a discussion of the Haldane principle in the modern context see Lord Rothschild, “The Organisation and Management of Government R & D”, inA Framework for Government Research and Development, Cmnd. 4814 (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1971), pp. 17–19, and Shonfield, Andrew, “The Social Sciences in the Great Debate on Science Policy”,Minerva, X (July 1972) pp. 426–438.

    Google Scholar 

  24. This point has been made forcibly by Lord Zuckerman on a number of occasions. See, for instance, Zuckerman, Sir Solly “The Limitations of Advisors”,Nature, CCXV (22 April, 1967), pp. 341–342; Lord Zuckerman, “Scientific Advice during and since World War II”,Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A, CCCXLII (1975), pp. 465–480.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research For the Year 1918–19 Cmd. 320 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1919), p. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  26. The Imperial Trust was set up by Royal Charter in 1916 to hold and administer funds at the disposal of the Department, in particular for the so-called “Million Fund” allocated by Parliament to finance cooperative research in industry.

  27. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research For the Year 1918–19,, pp. 75–77.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Public Record Office File, 3/255, DSIR, “Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on Patents” (5 October, 1921).

  29. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,Report of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research For the Year 1918–19,, p. 75.

    Google Scholar 

  30. , p. 76.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Details of the Committee, its report and papers of evidence are available in Public Record Office, Files 3/255-261, DSIR.

  32. Public Record Office, File 3/255, DSIR, “Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on Patents” (5 October, 1921).

  33. Public Record Office, File T161/145/S13017, Treasury, letter from P. Tindal Robertson to Eustace Davies (undated).

  34. Public Record Office, File T161/145/S13017, Treasury, letter from War Office to Treasury (3 August, 1922).

  35. Ibid. Public Record Office, File T161/145/S13017, Treasury, letter from War Office to Treasury (3 August, 1922).

  36. Public Record Office, File CAB 90/4, Cabinet Office, “Memorandum by the Joint Secretaries in reply to the Scientific Advisory Committee to the War Cabinet” (1943).

  37. The Scientific Advisory Committee was established early in the war to provide central scientific advice to the Cabinet. Although a precursor to the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy established after the war, it was not involved significantly in the more important scientific and technological achievements of the war. On the background to the Scientific Advisory Committee see McGucken, William, “The Royal Society and the Genesis of the Scientific Advisory Committee to Britain's War Cabinet, 1939–40”,Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, XXXIII (August 1978) pp. 87–115. See also McGucken, W., “The Central Organisation of Scientific and Technical Advice in the United Kingdom during the Second World War”,Minerva, XVII (Spring 1979), pp. 33–69.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Public Record Office, File CAB 9014, Cabinet Office, The Scientific Advisory Committee to the War Cabinet, “Draft Report on Patents” (1942).

  39. Most departments favoured the proposals although some, including the Ministry of Supply, were satisfied with existing procedures. The Admiralty, however, made it clear that they were opposed to the suggestions and did not think changes necessary. Public Record Office, File CAB 90/4, Cabinet Office, “Memorandum by the Joint Secretaries” (1943).

  40. Public Record Office, File CAB 90/4 Cabinet Office, The Scientific Advisory Committee to the War Cabinet, “Report on Patents” (1943).

  41. The Federation of British Industries,Industry and Research (London: Federation of British Industries, 1943).

  42. For a discussion of this issue see Board of Trade,Report of the Departmental Committee on the Patents and Designs Acts and Practice of the Patents Office, Cmd. 3829 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1931), pp. 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  43. .

    Google Scholar 

  44. Nuffield College,Problems of Scientific and Industrial Research: A Statement (Oxford: Nuffield College, 1944); The Association of Scientific Workers,Science in the Universities; A Report Submitted to the University Grants Committee of the Treasury (London: The Association of Scientific Workers, 1944).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Public Record Office, File CAB 87/63, Cabinet Office, “Report of the Steering Committee on Post-War Employment” (1944).

  46. Public Record Office, File CAB 87/63, Cabinet Office, Memorandum from the Board of Trade, “General Support of Trade” (15 October, 1943).

  47. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Report, Fifth Series, Vol. CCCXCIX, 1944, column 307.

  48. For a detailed review of this early intervention see Price, W. H.,The English Patents of Monopoly (London: Constable, 1906).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Bassalla, George, “Science and Government in England, 1800–1870”, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1963, pp. 11–16.

  50. In 1871 Alexander Strange observed that “At present the different Departments are inundated with inventions, which there is no one possessing both the needful qualifications and the requisite leisure to grapple with .... It is quite notorious that both the Departments and the inventors have great ground for complaint.” Strange, Lieut.Col. A., “On the Necessity For a Permanent Commission on State Scientific Questions”,Journal of the Royal United Services Institution, XV (1871) pp. 537–566.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Report of the Forty Second Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (London: John Murray, 1873), p. 243.

  52. Ibid. Report of the Forty Second Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (London: John Murray, 1873), p. 243.

  53. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research For the Year 1920–21, Cmd. 1491 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1921), p. 80.

    Google Scholar 

  54. In the years between the wars British industry, in spite of its generally depressed condition, assimilated many scientific innovations. Sanderson, Michael, “Research and the Firm in British Industry, 1919–39”,Science Studies, II (1972), pp. 107–151.

    Google Scholar 

  55. This episode, reported below, is described in Moseley, Russell, “Science, Government and Industrial Research: The Origins and Development of the National Physical Laboratory” unpublished D.Phil thesis, University of Sussex, 1976, p. 239.

  56. Ibid. Thes episode, reported below, is described in Moseley, Russell, “Science, Government and Industrial Research: The Origins and Development of the National Physical Laboratory” unpublished D.Phil thesis, University of Sussex, 1976, pp. 184–187.

  57. Ibid. This episode, reported below, is described in Moseley, Russell, “Science, Government and Industrial Research: The Origins and Development of the National Physical Laboratory” unpublished D.Phil thesis, University of Sussex, 1976, p. 239.

  58. See, for example, British Association for the Advancement of Science,Report of the Centenary Meeting, London 1931 (London: The British Association, 1932), p. 426, and Fleming, A. P. M., “Research and Industrial Development: Is a New Organisation Required?”,State Service (May 1933), pp. 31–32.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Economic Advisory Council,Report of the Committee on New Industrial Development (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1932).

    Google Scholar 

  60. , p. 24.

    Google Scholar 

  61. See Bernal, J. D., “DSIR Annual Reports for 1933–34 and 1934–35”,The Scientific Worker, IX (March 1936), pp. 37–42.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Quoted in Moseley, Russell, “Science, Government and Industrial Research”, p. 213.

  63. Political and Economic Planning,Report on the Location of Industry (London: P.E.P. 1939). The report was reviewed favourably by Brightman, R., “Establishment of New Industries”,Nature, CXLIII, (13 May, 1939), pp. 777–778. Brightman, however, had reviewed the earlier report somewhat uncritically; Brightman, R., “Factors of Industrial Development”,Nature, CXXX (12 November, 1932), pp. 713–716.

  64. Political and Economic Planning,op. cit. Report on the Location of Industry (London: P.E.P. 1939), p. 80.

  65. Ibid. Political and Economic Planning,op. cit. Report on the Location of Industry (London: P.E.P. 1939). p. 80.

  66. “Mass unemployment has destroyed confidence in progress and prosperity through private enterprise, while abundant intimations of available plenty dazzle us with new potentials of social achievement made possible by advancing scientific knowledge”. Hogben, Lancelot,Dangerous Thoughts (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1939), p. 17. For another explicit statement of scientists' feedlings that the potentialities of science were not being utilised, see Hall, Sir Daniel,et al., The Frustration of Science (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1935). In this volume both J. D. Bernal and P. M. S. Blackett referred to the suppression of new inventions by capitalistic firms;ibid., p. 72 and p. 135.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Williamson, J. W. “Research and Industry”,Nature, CXL (11 September, 1937), pp. 437–438.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Bernal, J. D.,The Social Function of Science (London: Routledge, 1939), pp. 138–147.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Blackett, P. M. S., et al.,T.U.C. 1944 (London: The Association of Scientific Workers, 1945).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Reported inNature, CXXXVIII (31 October, 1936), p. 737.

  71. A series of debates on this subject had been initiated after a campaign byNature as early as 1925. Following a report from the British Science Guild in 1928 a departmental committee was established to review the provisions of the patents and Designs Acts. Minor amendments followed from this. A further spate of concern culminated in the appointment of the Swan Committee to review the problem in the 1940s.

  72. Public Record Office, File CAB 71/27, Cabinet Office. Anderson, Sir John, memorandum, 10 April, 1945. The original memorandum is included as an annex to a later document, “Arrangements regarding the Holding of Patents, The Development and Testing of Inventions and The Establishment of New Industries”, circulated for discussion in the Lord President's industrial subcommittee of the Cabinet by Anderson's successor, Hugh Dalton, and dated 2 November, 1945.

  73. Anderson, Sir John, memorandum,op. cit., 10 April, 1945. The original memorandum is included as an annex to a later document, “Arrangements regarding the Holding of Patents, The Development and Testing of Inventions and The Establishment of New Industries”, circulated for discussion in the Lord President's industrial subcommittee of the Cabinet by Anderson's successor, Hugh Dalton, and dated 2 November, 1945.

  74. “Arrangements Regarding the Holding of Patents, ... ”, 2 November, 1945.

  75. Pariiamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDXIV, 1945, column 1045.

  76. Public Record Office, File CAB 71/27, Cabinet Office, “Minutes of the Fifth Meeting of the Industrial Sub-committee of the Lord President's Cabinet Committee” (26 November, 1946).

  77. Ibid. Public Record Office, File CAB 71/27, Cabinet Office, “Minutes of the Fifth Meeting of the Industrial Sub-committee of the Lord President's Cabinet Committee” (26 November, 1946).

  78. Palmer, industrial adviser to the Board of Trade, retired soon after and was replaced as chairman by R. M. Nowell, an under-secretary to the Board of Trade.

  79. This last item was removed from consideration in the light of powers made available under the Borrowing Act 1946.

  80. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from Sir William Palmer to Sir Alan Barlow (18 January, 1946).

  81. Public Record Office, File CAB 71/27, Cabinet Office, Minutes of the Fifth Meeting of the industrial subcommittee of the Lord President's Cabinet Committee (26 November, 1946).

  82. The subcommittee consisted of representatives from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, the Treasury, the Admiralty, the Ministry of Supply and Aircraft Production, the Board of Trade and Post Office.

  83. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, “Report of the Sub-committee of Functions and Constitution of the Trust” (17 April, 1946).

  84. Although I have been unable to locate a copy of the dissenting paper its objections were fully discussed at a subsequent meeting of the subcommittee; Public Record Office, File BT 64/2194, Board of Trade, memorandum, “National Research Trust Committee—Sub-committee Report and Treasury Counter Report” (16 May, 1946).

  85. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2194, Board of Trade, letter from B. Lane to L. Russell (17 April, 1946).

  86. Recorded in the memorandum “National Research Trust Committee—Sub-Committee Report and Treasury Counter Report” (16 May, 1946).

  87. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190 Board of Trade, letter from L. O. Russell to R. Kahn (8 July, 1946).

  88. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from L. O. Russell to Milner-Barry (17 August, 1946).

  89. Ibid. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from L. O. Russell to Milner-Barry (17) August, 1946).

  90. Ibid. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from L. O. Russell to Milner-Barry (17 August, 1946).

  91. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from Milner-Barry to L. O. Russell (16 September, 1946).

  92. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from L. O. Russell to R. Kahn (8 July, 1946).

  93. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2190, Board of Trade, letter from R. Kahn to R. M. Nowell (25 July, 1946).

  94. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2194, Board of Trade, letter from Sir Thomas Merton to the President of the Board of Trade (23 July, 1946); letter from E. V. Appleton to Sir William Palmer (undated).

  95. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2194, Board of Trade, National Research Trust Committee, Report to the President of the Board of Trade (17 July, 1947).

  96. The more moderate tone of the report undoubtedly also reflected the fact that a number of statutes either existed or were imminent which curtailed the need for extensive provisions. The Borrowing Act 1946 has already been briefly mentioned and other relevant measures included the Distribution of Industry Act 1945, the Industrial Organisation and Development Bill as well as the contact with the Swan Committee which would lead to amendments in the Patents and Designs Acts designed to curb practices of a monopolistic kind.

  97. In the event, this was to handicap the corporation. In the Development of Inventions Act 1954 it was, however, given an explicit brief to sponsor research for the full exploitation of an invention.

  98. “Report to the President of the Board of Trade” (17 July, 1947).

  99. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2389, Board of Trade, President's Case, “Development of Inventions Bill: Meeting of Parliamentary and Scientific Committee” (May 1948).

  100. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Lords, Official Reports, Vol. CLV (1948), column 574.

  101. Ibid. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Lords, Official Reports, Vol. CLV (1948), column 587.

  102. The Development of Inventions Act 1948.

  103. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDLI (1948), column 2675.

  104. Ibid. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDLI (1948), column 2677.

  105. Ibid. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDLI (1948), column 2690.

  106. Ibid. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDLI (1948), column 2719.

  107. Ibid. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDLI (1948), column 2715.

  108. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2383, “Development of Inventions Bill—House of Commons: President's Brief for Second Reading” (11 June, 1948).

  109. Ibid. Public Record Office, File BT 64/2383, “Development of Inventions Bill—House of Commons: President's Brief for Second Reading” (11 June, 1948).

  110. Harold Wilson, during the second reading of the Development of Inventions Bill;Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), House of Commons, Official Reports, Fifth Series, Vol. CDL 1 (1948), column 2677.

  111. The annual reports of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research have been used to provide the data in this paragraph.

  112. Nuffield College,Problems of Scientific and Industrial Research, p. 5.

  113. Ibid. Nuffield College,Problems of Scientific and Industrial Research, p. 15.

  114. See Keith, S. T., “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, pp. 76–99.

  115. The National Research Development Corporation,31st Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 1979–80 (London: N.R.D.C., 1980), p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  116. See Johnson, P. S.,The Economics of Invention and Innovation (London: Martin Robertson, 1975), pp. 229–324.

    Google Scholar 

  117. .

    Google Scholar 

  118. Drath, P., et al., “The Super-Computer Project”,Research Policy, VI (January 1977), pp. 2–34.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Keith, S. T.,op cit. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, pp. 28.

  120. One of these inventions was for a potato harvester and the other for a steam engine suitable for use in undeveloped countries. For details see Keith, S. T.,op. cit. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, pp. 81–82, 86–87.

  121. The National Research Development Corporation,31st Annual Report... p. 12.

  122. Details of a number of brief case studies of N.R.D.C.'s attempts to sponsor private inventions have been published elsewhere: Grossfield, K., “N.R.D.C. Private Inventor Projects”,Bulletin of the National Research Development Corporation, 47 (1977–78), pp. 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  123. See for instance Hope, Adrian, “The Death of an Idea”,New Scientist, LXXXIII (13 September, 1979), pp. 794–797.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Grossfield, K.,.

    Google Scholar 

  125. The National Research Development Corporation,Evidence Offered to the Committee to Review the Functions of Financial Institutions (The Wilson Committee), (London: N.R.D.C., 1978), p. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Keith, S. T.,op. cit. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, p. 105. A brief account of the Corporation's development has been published elsewhere; Haigh, G. E.,et al., “N.R.D.C. and the Environment for Innovation”,Nature, CCXXXII (20 August, 1971), pp. 527–531.

  127. Keith, S. T.,op. cit., “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, p. 71. For a published account of N.R.D.C.'s work in the biochemical field see: Cain, J. C., “N.R.D.C. and Biological Chemistry”,Bulletin of the National Research Development Corporation, 30 (July 1967), pp. 5–10.

  128. On N.R.D.C.'s support for cephalosporin development see Keith, S. T.,op. cit. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, pp. 87–89; Cain, J. C.,op. cit., “N.R.D.C. and Biological Chemistry”,Bulletin of the National Research Development Corporation, 30 (July 1967), pp. 8–10; and The National Research Development Corporation,Evidence Offered to the Committee to Review the Functions of Financial Institutions, pp. 17–19.

  129. Keith, S. T.,op. cit. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, p. 89.

  130. The National Research Development Corporation,Evidence Offered to the Committee to Review the Functions of Financial Institutions, p. 18.

  131. Ibid. Keith, S. T., “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, p. 89.

  132. Ibid. Keith, S. T. “The National Research Development Corporation 1948–1964”, unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Aston in Birmingham, 1978, p. 89.

  133. Figure determined from the annual reports of the N.R.D.C. during this period.

  134. See Homer, Ronald F., “Pyrethrin analogue insecticides”,Bulletin of the National Research Development Corporation, 51 (Winter 1979–80), pp. 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  135. , p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. S. T. Keith
    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

Keith, S.T. Inventions, patents and commercial development from governmentally financed research in Great Britain: The origins of the National Research Development Corporation. Minerva 19, 92–122 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02192550

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02192550

Keywords

Search

Navigation