SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

 IN SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST ASIA

 

A Comparative Review

 

By Kingsley A. de Alwis

 

Introduction

The application of the latest developments in science and technology (S&T) to industry, agriculture and environmental protection in the poorer countries of South and Southeast Asia is a sine qua non for the rapid improvement of their economies and living standards. The returns to investments in the development of S&T have been shown to provide the best economic returns as well, especially in countries with limited resources.

 Advances in many fields of S&T, such as biotechnology, information technology, materials science, nano-technology, environmental science and biochemistry are taking place at a very rapid rate in the scientifically more developed countries. However, the divide between the state of S&T development in these countries and its state in the less developed countries is widening by the day, mainly due to low levels of investment and lack of policies that encourage the growth of S&T in the latter. The economies of countries that are able to avail themselves of such advanced technologies in their industry and agriculture are forging ahead, while those of countries that are unable to generate or access and apply these knowledge-based resources are falling further behind.

 

Developing countries have been grouped by the World Bank[1] into three broad levels of S&T development:

 

Ø             scientifically proficient countries which have reached equality or near-equality with the scientifically advanced countries (Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, India, Lithuania, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Ukraine)

 

Ø             scientifically developing countries that have pockets of adequate scientific and technological capacity amidst general scarcity (Argentina, Armenia, Benin, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Latvia, Macedonia, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yugoslavia; and

 

Ø             scientifically lagging countries which lack S&T capacity almost entirely (Burundi, Central African Rep., Congo, Dem. Rep., Ecuador, Gabon, Georgia Guatemala, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Malaysia, Nepal, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Rep., Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Vietnam)

 Whether the classification of Sri Lanka and Malaysia in the third group is justified or not is a moot point. However, a number of developing countries in South and Southeast Asia have, in recent times, been able to build up science and technology systems that are perceived to be more effective and successful than the S&T system of Sri Lanka. These countries include India, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Taiwan. Analysis of the ingredients that account for the success of the S&T systems in some of these countries may help in formulating improved policies and programmes for future S & T development in Sri Lanka.

 Science and Technology Development Indicators

 A number of indicators are commonly used to evaluate the level of development of science and technology in a country. These include:

Ø             the number of scientists, engineers and technicians employed in research and development;

Ø             the number of students enrolled in science and engineering;

Ø             the number of scientific and technical publications in prestigious journals;

Ø             exports of high-technology products;

Ø             sales and purchases of technology through royalties and licenses; and

Ø             the number of patent applications filed.

Table 1 shows the indicators of science and technology development for a number of countries in South and Southeast Asia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comparison of the indicators for Sri Lanka with those for other countries in the region shows a paradoxical situation. Thus, in regard to the human capital needed for successful science and technology development (scientists, engineers, technicians, science students), Sri Lanka is proportionately ahead of other countries which are generally perceived to have more successful S&T systems, such as Malaysia, Thailand and India!  However, with respect to the outputs of the S&T system (publications, high technology exports, royalty and license fees, and patent applications), Sri Lanka is well behind these other countries.

The conclusion that must necessarily be drawn is that the productivity of our scientists and technical personnel is relatively low. This is not because our scientists are in any way less brilliant or capable than those of other countries, as evidenced by the outstanding contributions made in specific fields by many Sri Lankan scientists in foreign lands as well as on the local scene, but because of other reasons which will be discussed below.

 The differences in S&T capacity between the scientifically advanced countries, such as those of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), and the poorer countries of the developing world are even more staggering. Annual expenditure on R&D by OECD countries is more than the value of total economic output of 61 of the world’s poorest countries (US$ 500 billion versus US$ 464 billion in 1998)[2]. The OECD countries also have twelve times the number of scientists and engineers per capita working in R&D compared to the poorer countries and they publish 25 times more scientific papers per capita. The ratio of patents filed by non-residents to those filed by residents is 3.3 to one, while in low-income countries it is 690 to1. Of course, S&T capacity cannot be judged on the basis of such indicators alone, but other less quantifiable factors such as the linkages between science and industry, tell the same story: we are being left further and further behind by the developed countries.

 Effectiveness of Science and Technology Systems

 In general, the effectiveness of a country’s science and technology system in contributing to its development depends on:

 

(i)                  the level of education and training of the population;

(ii)                the demand for technical know-how by the private sector;

(iii)               public policies that provide an enabling environment for building strong knowledge institutions; and,

(iv)              the efficacy of the information and communication technology (ICT) systems that permit the flow and dissemination of improved technologies.

When all these factors and the institutions are in place, significant progress can be made in the application of S&T to stimulating economic growth and reducing poverty. When the appropriate S&T infrastructure is not developed, countries lose competitiveness and fall further behind in relation to more technologically advanced countries.

Science and technology is associated in the public mind with new discoveries, inventions and knowledge resulting from cutting edge research. However, this impression is only a partial representation of the contribution of S&T to development. A majority of the benefits of S&T come through dissemination of knowledge, and its transformation into goods and services through application of technology and engineering. These applications could be in industrial sectors like manufacturing, as well as in other sectors such as health, agriculture, and natural resource management. The vast majority of new developments in S&T involve the adaptation, modification and application to local situations, of discoveries that a very small number of individuals have made. In fact, the main value of S&T education is to build the capacity of people to understand and apply innovations, not to advance fundamental knowledge per se.

 

Reasons for Poor Performance of S&T in Sri Lanka

The poor output of the S&T establishment in Sri Lanka in comparison with other countries in the region may be attributed inter alia to the following factors:

1. Low overall expenditure on R&D. Sri Lanka spends only 0.20 % of its Gross National Income (GNI) on R&D as against 0.73% of GNI spent by India, 0.39 % of GNI by Malaysia, 2.82 % of GNI by South Korea, 1.82 % of GNI by Taiwan and 1.76 % of GNI by Singapore. Besides, the actual amounts spent on S&T by these other countries exceeds the amount spent by Sri Lanka by a wide margin, since their GNIs are much higher than that of Sri Lanka in absolute terms. Unfortunately, a major part of even this modest expenditure on S&T by Sri Lanka goes largely to pay salaries and allowances of staff, with relatively little going to finance the actual implementation of R&D programmes.

2. Low investment in S&T by the state sector.  Where the private sector is weak and does not make adequate demands on the R&D establishment, strong support by the state has been successful in nurturing the growth of S&T until the private sector could take up this role. This was the case in India for many decades after independence. India's first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru firmly supported a concerted, government-led programme of S&T development in that country. The government itself decided to take on the task of launching a broad-based, extensive S&T network and, along with the people, was the main client of the R&D programme, the fledgling private sector still being at that time unable either to play a substantive role in S&T development or to make adequate demands on the government supported R&D system.

The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, which was set up to support private industry in general, subsequently expanded with the establishment of various institutions dedicated to the development of specific industries. The government also started a programme for the development of adequate trained and competent S&T manpower and for the building of the necessary infrastructure to work towards specific goals in a time-targeted manner. It is only now, with adequate growth resulting from this programme, that the private sector is taking a dominant role in the development of technology to a level that is helping Indian firms to become globally competitive.

Although Sri Lanka set off along a similar path after independence, its leadership did not have the vision and dedication that the Indian leaders had in strongly supporting and investing in the development of science and technology.

3. Low private sector expenditure on S&T.  In developed countries, the private sector accounts for over 60% of total R&D expenditures. Thus, Korea’s industry accounts for over four fifths of all R&D expenditure and Malaysia’s for over two thirds and Singapore’s about 60%. In Sri Lanka, industry R&D accounted for only 1.5% of all reported R&D in 2001. The main reason for low investment in R&D by the private sector in Sri Lanka is the lack of connection between the R& D establishment and the productive sector (agriculture, industry and services). This is in turn related to the lack of demand for R&D from the private sector on the one hand and lack of relevance to potential clients of much of the on-going research (be it in agriculture or in industry) on the other.
4. Poorly developed high-technology production. Sri Lanka’s high-tech exports constituted only 3% of all manufactured exports in 1999, as compared to 32% for South Korea, 59% for Malaysia, 59% for the Philippines and 61% for Singapore. Production of high technology goods increases the demand for S&T inputs, initially to adapt and apply existing technology and, later, to develop new innovations that could give a competitive edge to manufacturers and producers in the country
5. Inappropriate policy environment. Development of S&T capacity and support for R&D alone cannot sustain continued growth in the manufacture of high technology products. An enabling policy environment is needed to stimulate the demand for R&D from the private sector, as was the case in Singapore, Taiwan, Korea and Malaysia. In the case of Sri Lanka, the poor performance of high technology production and exports has been due to the closed, protectionist economic policies followed by all successive governments until the late 1970s. Although there was some economic liberalisation since then, the move towards an open economy geared to competing effectively on the world market has been very slow. Public policy on primary and secondary education, though ensuring a high degree of literacy, has failed to address problems of poor quality, inadequate facilities and shortage of science teachers. Higher education has been severely constrained by finances and the inward-looking mentality of teaching staff and students, jealously guarding their turf. Every effort to establish private universities and higher educational institutions to bring additional financing into the sector has been thwarted by protests and organized demonstrations.

Other policy malfunctions requiring attention are:

Ø             the failure of the government to develop infrastructure for research and ICT;

Ø             lack of adequate legal measures to safeguard intellectual property rights;

Ø             failure to encourage international technological cooperation;

Ø             half-hearted policy of tax breaks and government investment and subsidies to induce foreign high-tech companies to set up manufacturing facilities here; and

Ø             inadequate support to R&D in areas of growing national and international concern such as the environment, sustainable use of natural resources, and health issues involved in new technologies (such as the consumption of genetically modified foods).

In all these areas, the Asian countries mentioned above have followed policies leading to the growth of high technology industries and services.

6. Brain drain. In comparison with other countries in South and Southeast Asia, Sri Lanka has suffered the most severe losses, almost a haemorrhage, of scientific and technological talent over the past half century. Poor remuneration and career prospects, lack of educational opportunities for children, endemic ethnic and civil strife, lack of funding for research and recognition for researchers, and inadequate opportunities for contact with foreign colleagues, all contributed to this exodus.
7. Lack of efforts to promote high technology industries. Most of the countries in the Asian region that have been successful in promoting the rapid growth of high-tech industries (China, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, et al.) have launched specific initiatives for this purpose. These initiatives include: core science-based industrial parks; knowledge-based satellite industrial parks; science cities; etc.

 

Common Factors in Successful S&T Development

 In summary, common factors across countries with S&T systems which are perceived to be more successful than that of Sri Lanka, include: 

1. A vision and a blueprint for development of S&T – Outstanding examples are India (Scientific Policy Resolution of 1958 and subsequent 5-year plans) and Taiwan (A Blueprint for Scientific and Technological Development into the Next Century); but all the countries mentioned as having more advanced S&T systems have planned ahead and invested in the growth of S&T.
2. Effective science policies in support of industry and agriculture
3. Policies and investments to promote the development of high-tech industries
4. Establishment of Institutions with clear responsibility for the development of S&T – e.g. Department of Science and Technology in India
5. Establishment of scientific research infrastructure
6. Viable science education system at primary, secondary and tertiary levels
7. Designation of Key Areas or priorities for R&D
8. Properly functioning technology transfer (ICT) systems
9. Demand-driven (client-oriented) technology development programmes including science-based industrial parks, etc.
10. Economic opportunities, incentives and reward systems for stemming brain drain – All the scientifically more advanced countries have provided rewards and economic incentives to keep their scientists and technicians from leaving for greener pastures.
11. Inducements for expatriate scientists to return – Malaysia has consistently provided incentives for its scientists and technicians who have gone abroad to return to the country.

12.   Social recognition of scientists (e.g. the President of India) - The election of a renowned scientist as President of India is proof enough, if proof were needed, of the importance given by India to science and the esteem in which scientists are held in that country.

 

Policy Options for Countries with Less Developed S& T Systems, adapted from World Bank[3]

 The World Bank has identified a set of policy options for countries with developed, partially developed and less developed S&T systems. This could provide the basis for developing a policy of our own. The policy options in the different subsectors adapted for Sri Lanka are outlined below.

 Policies for Basic and Secondary Education

·         Incorporate basic science education into the primary and secondary level curricula

·         Provide sufficient training to primary and secondary level teachers so that they are prepared with the skills necessary to teach basic sciences

·         Benchmark effectiveness of student learning by participating in international assessments (e.g., TIMSS)

Policies for Technical, Scientific and Engineering Education

·         Foment relationships with the private sector to ensure relevance of skills taught to market needs

·         Allow for differentiation of foci between institutions (e.g., institute for specific vocations, automotive schools, etc,)

·         While ultimately housing high quality universities with strong science and engineering departments is ideal, initially regional centres of excellence with emphasis in specific disciplines may better satisfy the needs of the market given budget constraints

Policies for Scientific Research and Graduate Study

·         Focus on creating a few centres of excellence in market-relevant areas of S&T in which the country has a comparative advantage at the regional level

·         Provide grants for scientific research and training abroad coupled with incentive programs to return to minimize brain drain

·         Link national development priorities to areas of training and research and concentrate financing on building a few strong academic programs in the identified priority disciplines

Implicit Policies

·         Establish basic macroeconomic stability, including curbed inflation, strong currency, and proper rates of savings and investment

·         Open to trade and foreign direct investment to foster the inflow of knowledge

·         Improve the credit environment for individuals and small businesses

Explicit Policies

·         Establish a framework for the protection of indigenous knowledge

·         Subsidize firm-based training to encourage technology deepening

Funding Science

·         Leverage benefits from privately performed research conducted abroad through creative public-private partnerships

·         Let the magnitude and urgency of domestic challenges to development establish priorities for the national S&T agenda

Monitoring and Evaluating

·         Promote transparency, objectivity and peer review and evaluation procedures in determining how to award discretionary research funding.

Governance and Regulation

·         Articulate a national science agenda balanced between leveraging existing knowledge in the sciences and pursuing a few areas of national interest and comparative advantage

·         Prepare for improved governmental regulatory capacity in areas concerning public health, public safety, and other areas relevant to S&T

·         Prioritize metrology, standards and testing to meet international benchmarks for quality, measurements, etc.

·         Ensure equal access to resources for training, funding, and performance across race, gender, etc.

Policies for ICT Access

·         Extend access of available ICTs to a wider range of users.

·         Build out infrastructure to extend coverage.

Policies for ICT Use

·         Improve regulatory framework to facilitate conducive environment for ICT growth.

·         Provide support for the training and education of the human capital base with respect to ICT use.

Policies for ICT Research

·         Scientifically lagging countries should generally concern themselves less with ICT-related knowledge creation and more with the challenges related to the expansion of overage, use and access.

 

 

Conclusions

 

•The main constraint to development of S&T in Sri Lanka is the lack of demand. You can’t push on a string.

•Demand will improve only when a high-tech private sector is able to develop in Sri Lanka or, in the interim, there is substantial foreign direct investment in the high-tech sector.

•This requires an enabling policy environment and investment in the necessary infrastructure and training.

•Policies and investments in a number of related sectors – finance, education, industry, agriculture – in addition to S&T policies, impact on the development of S&T.

•Strong encouragement of foreign direct investment and building of links with global high-tech industries and enterprises would be required to capitalize on the globalization of the (out-sourced) S&T market.

 

Role of NASSL

•NASSL can play a pivotal role in helping the government to frame pro-S&T policies in the different sectors.

•However, in this case too, the demand has to be there, even the NASSL cannot push on a string !