Maybe separating state funded research from privately funded research is the wrong perspective: for example in France there was a major entanglement of private

Maybe separating state funded research from privately funded research is the wrong perspective: for example in France there was a major entanglement of private and public structures (organizations, funding, people) after WW2 and that is still the case, even at the European level (is research done in state-funded labs with/for Airbus in Toulouse public or private research? Does it make sense to try to entangle state, private, European funding there? Who really decided that there must be aeronautical research here and now?). A more dynamic view might better explain what’s going on: the flow of public money, the grants criterias, the state funded researchers gone to work for private companies for some years and then coming back… Some example of this entanglement: - in France any company can ask for a dedicated Credit Impôt Recherche, a tax credit for research purposes. Most seem granted for projects that are very light on fundamental research. That allowed many small companies to set up research/lab teams. It seems a more lightweight continuation of the European policy to help companies to integrate research and to create consortiums. - when looking up public AI research in France, I found that nearly all the top AI/ML researchers based in France have been recruited by Google and Facebook. They are still fully part of their original, state-funded labs, but now work and are paid by Google/Facebook. They seem to still do the same kind of research they were doing at their state-funded labs. I’m sure there’s other examples in other countries