Guest Editorial/

Interesting or Important? Resetting the Balance of Theory and Application

by Randall J. Hunt1 and John Doherty2,3
Hydrogeology was founded on the need to solve real-world problems, and societal needs underpinned hydrogeologic investigations during the 20th century. Theory was an adjunct for solving societal problems. In the mid-1930s, well hydraulic theory was introduced to quantify the transient response around an individual pumping well. In the 1960s, an understanding of ow beyond the single well was needed and a theoretical representation of a regional ow system was developed. Transport observations in the early 1900s were followed by transport theory, which in turn was followed by eld work testing the theory. Groundwater modeling too iterated between theory and application, where real-world concerns informed and directed theoretical development. This complementary feedback of theory and application has become decoupled in the 21st century. Many theoretical developments languish in academic journals and remain unapplied; state-of-the-practice approaches reect the era when hydrogeologists were trained more than the state of the current science. Decoupling arises from many factors. The sum of theoretical investigation is on the whole larger than in the 20th century. Hydrogeology has become more specialized; niche areas or research microenvironments provide publication outlets for ndings not widely applicable. Evaluation of research proposals and distribution of funds are often uncoupled from the societal need that drove the initial request for the proposal. Finally, publication in a peer-reviewed journal is viewed as the coin of the impact realman objective quantum of scientic contribution. The explosion of publications provides many opportunities to stamp these coins, irrespective of the exchange rate of the resulting currency. An unfortunate result of decoupling is that there is little sorting of the interesting (that which is publishable) from the important (that which has widespread utility to solve societal problems). Such lack of sorting is not benign. Research funds for hydrological work will become scarcer as other societal needs become more dire; interesting alone will not automatically translate to valuable. Moreover, there is an opportunity cost: Overemphasizing the interesting crowds out effort that could be done on the societally important. Perhaps most tellingly, to a non-scientist, such imbalance makes it appear as if we are ddling while Rome burns. Todays water-resource problems are getting larger, more coalesced/connected, more interdisciplinary, and affecting more and more people. Efforts dominated with curiosity driven research on narrow, but interesting, things might be considered a luxury ill-afforded by a water-stressed public. What can be done to restore the balance of application and theory? A renewed emphasis on applications designed to test theoretical constructs is needed. Collaboration between theoretical and applied researchers and outreach/training elements should be explicit in a work plan, not left to luck and serendipity. Professional societies should bring the metric of application to the fore on all awards, not just the subset of awards that highlight non-theoretical aspects of hydrogeology. As in the 20th century, a lifetime of eld experience should be recognized as valuable as a swathe of publications. Academic assessment should do more than cursorily acknowledge the need for education that equips students with both the practical and theoretical knowledge to solve the large environmental and water management challenges that society faces. Such efforts would emphasize that true impact is ultimately valued using metrics beyond citation counts. The economic or societal benets, and the feedback of practitioners, are all needed to judge the value added. With such a view, a short fact sheet or software utility that facilitates better hydrogeological problem solving would be valued higher than publication in a highimpact factor journal, which is seen by some, cited by less, and applied by none. We expect those comfortable in the current system will not see value in such rebalancing. But the effect of research that overly emphasizes the academic seems selfevident; not many look to have their work characterized as Ivory Tower. In many ways, hydrogeology started out as a boots-on-the-ground science. As such, we believe rebalancing, along with a renewed focus on applied aspects of our science, will ultimately serve society, our industry, and the future of hydrogeology, most effectively. Editors Note: Opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the National Ground Water Association, the U.S. Geological Survey, or National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training. Vol. 49, No. 3GROUND WATERMay-June 2011 301

Wisconsin Water Science Center, 8505 Research Way, Middleton, WI 53562; rjhunt@usgs.gov 2 Watermark Numerical Computing, Corinda, Queensland, Australia; johndoherty@ozemail.com.au 3 National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2011, The Author(s) Ground Water 2011, National Ground Water Association. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00807.x

1 USGS

NGWA.org