The decline of disruptive science and technology

TL;DR

Despite exponential growth in scientific and technological knowledge, recent decades show a universal decline in disruptive innovations, indicating a fundamental shift in the nature of scientific progress.

Contribution

This study provides large-scale empirical evidence that the rate of disruptive science and technology has declined over 6 decades across multiple fields.

Findings

Papers and patents are less likely to be disruptive over time.

Decline in disruptiveness is linked to narrower use of prior knowledge.

The pattern is consistent across different scientific and technological fields.

Abstract

Theories of scientific and technological change view discovery and invention as endogenous processes, wherein prior accumulated knowledge enables future progress by allowing researchers to, in Newton's words, "stand on the shoulders of giants". Recent decades have witnessed exponential growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, thereby creating conditions that should be ripe for major advances. Yet contrary to this view, studies suggest that progress is slowing in several major fields of science and technology. Here, we analyze these claims at scale across 6 decades, using data on 45 million papers and 3.5 million patents from 6 large-scale datasets. We find that papers and patents are increasingly less likely to break with the past in ways that push science and technology in new directions, a pattern that holds universally across fields. Subsequently, we link this decline in disruptiveness to a narrowing in the use of prior knowledge, allowing us to reconcile the patterns we observe with the "shoulders of giants" view. We find that the observed declines are unlikely to be driven by changes in the quality of published science, citation practices, or field-specific factors. Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology.