The complex and intricate relationship between incremental science, innovation and recognition

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

Science, technology, and innovation are related but distinct, leading to different research incentives. Incremental science, such as refining methods and validating findings, ensures robust results and understanding, laying the groundwork for breakthroughs. Due to pressures for ongoing innovation, fundamental research is frequently seen as an obstacle hindering scientific progress instead of an investment. The time fundamental research requires to bear fruit can detract from its immediate relevance, and impatience surrounding the urgency for rapid innovation further devalues the relatively slow, methodical approach of basic science. But this emphasis can be misleading, as many crucial advances arise from incremental improvements or refinements rather than radical breakthroughs. Insisting on scientific novelty devalues the work that lays the essential groundwork for reliable scientific progress and endorses a culture where only the most sensational achievements are celebrated, marginalising the essential contributions of those engaged in less glamorous, yet equally important, foundational research. We argue that instead of focusing on celebrating novelty and its often-unrealised societal impacts, science and technology should better value more vital basic, incremental, and knowledge-based contributions necessary for sustaining innovation and ensuring its diverse, positive impacts.