The Survey of State Government Research and Development measures the extent of R&D activity performed and funded by the governments of each of the nation’s 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico (collectively, states). By employing consistent, uniform definitions and collection techniques, the survey allows collection of state R&D expenditures data that are comparable nationwide. The survey is a census of state government departments, agencies, commissions, public authorities, and dependent entities with R&D activities. This dataset includes Survey of State Government Research and Development assets for 2022.

A catalog of high-value public science and research data sets from across the Federal Government.

This guide brings together online resources that contain U.S. government documents. Some are freely available to anyone with Internet access. Others include subscription databases accessible with a DHS device.

United States US: Government Intramural Expenditure on R&D (GOVERD) data was reported at 75.823 USD bn in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 73.443 USD bn for 2022. United States US: Government Intramural Expenditure on R&D (GOVERD) data is updated yearly, averaging 35.945 USD bn from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2023, with 43 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 75.823 USD bn in 2023 and a record low of 13.455 USD bn in 1981. United States US: Government Intramural Expenditure on R&D (GOVERD) data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, some respondents revised their reporting practices and eliminated expenditures that did not meet the definition of R&D during the 2023 BERD data collection. This has resulted in a meaningful decrease in estimated U.S. R&D performance compared to the amount of 2023 R&D performance that would have been estimated based on respondent reporting practices used in 2022 and earlier..From 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2021. As of 2022, it is based on official personnel data available for all sectors. For years 2020 and 2021, it is based on official personnel data available for the business, PNP and Higher Education sectors, and OECD estimates for the Government sector (for estimating the missing FFRDC component). For previous years, OECD estimates were readjusted back to 2000.

The government personnel data includes the state government R&D personnel from 2021 and FFRDC R&D personnel from 2022. However, 8 FFRDC centres are not included as they could not report their R&D personnel data. These 8 centres account for 24% of the total R&D expenditure of all FFRDCs in 2022. Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

A catalog of high-value public science and research data sets from across the Federal Government.

A list showing the names of licensed studies and research centers until 2023

Forecast: Total Government Research and Development Expenditure in the US 2024 - 2028 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

United States US: Space Programmes: % of Civil GBARD data was reported at 15.137 % in 2024. This records an increase from the previous number of 14.801 % for 2023. United States US: Space Programmes: % of Civil GBARD data is updated yearly, averaging 17.726 % from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2024, with 44 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 25.102 % in 1996 and a record low of 11.389 % in 2009. United States US: Space Programmes: % of Civil GBARD data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Government Budgets for Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, from 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2019. Comprehensive reporting of R&D personnel statistics by the United States has resumed with records available since 2020, reflecting the addition of official figures for the number of researchers and total R&D personnel for the higher education sector and the Private non-profit sector; as well as the number of researchers for the government sector. The new data revise downwards previous OECD estimates as the OECD extrapolation methods drawing on historical US data, required to produce a consistent OECD aggregate, appear to have previously overestimated the growth in the number of researchers in the higher education sector.

Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

The National Survey of Research Commercialisation (NSRC), which has been conducted since 2000, collects data on the commercialisation activities of publicly funded research organisations such as …Show full descriptionThe National Survey of Research Commercialisation (NSRC), which has been conducted since 2000, collects data on the commercialisation activities of publicly funded research organisations such as universities, medical research institutes and government research agencies. The survey includes data relating to research expenditure, licensing, research contracts and consultancies and research training. Further information about the survey (including other data sets and notes on the survey methodology) is available from the National Survey of Research Commercialisation page of the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources website: http://industry.gov.au/innovation/NSRC/Pages/default.aspx.

United States US: Total Researchers: Full-Time Equivalent data was reported at 1,639,258.000 FTE in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,513,964.000 FTE for 2020. United States US: Total Researchers: Full-Time Equivalent data is updated yearly, averaging 998,340.036 FTE from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2021, with 41 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,639,258.000 FTE in 2021 and a record low of 531,938.478 FTE in 1981. United States US: Total Researchers: Full-Time Equivalent data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Number of Researchers and Personnel on Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, from 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2019. Comprehensive reporting of R&D personnel statistics by the United States has resumed with records available since 2020, reflecting the addition of official figures for the number of researchers and total R&D personnel for the higher education sector and the Private non-profit sector; as well as the number of researchers for the government sector. The new data revise downwards previous OECD estimates as the OECD extrapolation methods drawing on historical US data, required to produce a consistent OECD aggregate, appear to have previously overestimated the growth in the number of researchers in the higher education sector.

Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

This data collection examines the effects of organizational environment and funding level on the utility of criminal justice research projects sponsored by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The data represent a unique source of information on factors that influence the quality and utility of criminal justice research. Variables describing the research grants include NIJ office responsible for monitoring the grant (e.g., courts, police, corrections, etc.), organization type receiving the grant (academic or nonacademic), type of data (collected originally, existing, merged), and priority area (crime, victims, parole, police). The studies are also classified by: (1) sampling method employed, (2) presentation style, (3) statistical analysis employed, (4) type of research design, (5) number of observation points, and (6) unit of analysis. Additional variables provided include whether there was a copy of the study report in the National Criminal Justice Archive, whether the study contained recommendations for policy or practice, and whether the project was completed on time. The data file provides two indices--one that represents quality and one that represents utility. Each measure is generated from a combination of variables in the dataset.

(1) The Government Research Bulletin (GRB) contains research project data from government agencies since 1982, and provides query, browsing, and full-text download services for publicly accessible research project data. (2) The intellectual property of the included research reports belongs to the agencies or project leaders. For further understanding of the report content or providing improvement suggestions, please contact the organizing agency or project leader directly.

Forecast: Total Government Research and Development Expenditure in Germany 2024 - 2028 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

Forecast: Total Government Research and Development Expenditure in China 2024 - 2028 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

Forecast: Total Government Research and Development Expenditure in France 2024 - 2028 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

As industry-university collaborations are promoted to commercialize university research and foster economic growth, it is important to understand how companies benefit from these collaborations, and to ensure that resulting academic discoveries are developed for the benefit of all stakeholders: companies, universities and public. Lock up of inventions, and censoring of academic publications, should be avoided if feasible. This case-study analysis of interviews with 90 companies in Canada, Japan, the UK and USA assesses the scope of this challenge and suggests possible resolutions. The participating companies were asked to describe an important interaction with universities, and most described collaborative research. The most frequently cited tensions concerned intellectual property management and publication freedom. IP disagreements were most frequent in the context of narrowly-focused collaborations with American universities. However, in the case of exploratory research, companies accepted the IP management practices of US universities. It might make sense to let companies have an automatic exclusive license to IP from narrowly defined collaborations, but to encourage universities to manage inventions from exploratory collaborations to ensure development incentives. Although Canada, the UK and US have strong publication freedom guarantees, tensions over this issue arose frequently in focused collaborations, though were rare in exploratory collaborations. The UK Lambert Agreements give sponsors the option to control publications in return for paying the full economic cost of a project. This may offer a model for the other three countries. Uniquely among the four countries, Japan enables companies to control exclusively most collaborative inventions and to censor academic publications. Despite this high degree of control, the interviews suggest many companies do not develop university discoveries to their full potential. The steps suggested above may rebalance the situation in Japan. Overall, the interviews reveal the complexity of these issues and the need for flexibility on the part of universities and companies.

Fiscal files of the subordinate unit of the Academia Sinica's Scientific Research Fund for the year 2017.

United States US: Civil GBARD: Current PPP: Non-Oriented Research Programmes data was reported at 15.419 USD bn in 2024. This records a decrease from the previous number of 15.701 USD bn for 2023. United States US: Civil GBARD: Current PPP: Non-Oriented Research Programmes data is updated yearly, averaging 6.479 USD bn from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2024, with 44 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 16.390 USD bn in 2022 and a record low of 1.340 USD bn in 1981. United States US: Civil GBARD: Current PPP: Non-Oriented Research Programmes data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Government Budgets for Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, some respondents revised their reporting practices and eliminated expenditures that did not meet the definition of R&D during the 2023 BERD data collection. This has resulted in a meaningful decrease in estimated U.S. R&D performance compared to the amount of 2023 R&D performance that would have been estimated based on respondent reporting practices used in 2022 and earlier..From 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2021. As of 2022, it is based on official personnel data available for all sectors. For years 2020 and 2021, it is based on official personnel data available for the business, PNP and Higher Education sectors, and OECD estimates for the Government sector (for estimating the missing FFRDC component). For previous years, OECD estimates were readjusted back to 2000.

The government personnel data includes the state government R&D personnel from 2021 and FFRDC R&D personnel from 2022. However, 8 FFRDC centres are not included as they could not report their R&D personnel data. These 8 centres account for 24% of the total R&D expenditure of all FFRDCs in 2022. Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

Although federally supported research plays a crucial role in driving innovation, its contribution is underestimated when the US government’s research support is not properly acknowledged in patents from an evaluation perspective. Moreover, because the US government is entitled to exercise patents arising from its research support for public safety or public health when the US government’s involvement in patents is properly acknowledged, failure to document its research support in patents limits potential social benefits that a patented invention can realize through the US government’s use. Analyzing about 84,000 US patent-paper pairs (PPPs), of the PPPs having patents on research outcomes originating from federal support, 28% did not acknowledge the US government’s research support in the patents. Further findings imply that the private stake in the use of the research outcomes is negatively associated with the likelihood of acknowledging US government research support in patents.

Table 1.1.4: Issues of the Federal Government for Science, Research and Development by department