- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA: NEW TRENDS AND OLD MODELS
Abstract
This paper reviews the operation of the science and technology (S&T) for development strategy in the developing countries of Asia since its introduction in the 1960s. It is particularly concerned with the performance of S&T policy-making and planning in promoting the goals of that S&T for development strategy. The various problems which the strategy has faced are discussed, and the subsequent trends, especially towards greater emphasis on S&T policymaking and planning, are explained. The paper concludes by assessing the implications of these problems and trends for the entire S&T for development strategy in the developing countries of Asia.
Content
Author and article information
NOTES AND REFERENCES
Unesco, Statistical Yearbook 1986, Unesco, Paris, 1986.
See, for example, writings by critics such as Frank, Paul A. Baran, Paul M. Sweezy and Samir Amin.
For example, Eugene Rabinowitch and Victor Rabinowitch (eds), Views of Science, Technology and Development, Pergamon, Oxford, 1975; David Dickson, Alternative Technology and the Politics of Technical Change, Fontana/Collins, London, 1974; Charles Cooper (ed.), Science. Technology and Development: The Political Economy of Technical Advance in Underdeveloped Countries, Frank Cass, London, 1973. More recently, critics such as A.K.N. Reddy, E.F. Schumacher, Paul Streeten, Charles Moraze, Denis Goulet, Susan George, Frances Stewart and many others have criticised science and technology in development.
The early history of science policy in developed nations is succinctly reviewed in Sol Encel and Jarlath Ronayne (eds), Science, Technology and Public Policy: An International Perspective, Pergamon, Rushcutter's Bay, 1979; and more extensively in Jean-Jacques Salomon, ‘Science policy studies and the development of science policy’ in Ina Spiegel-Rösing and Derek de Solla Price (eds), Science, Technology and Society: A Cross Disciplinary Perspective, Sage Publications, London, 1977, pp. 43–70; and Ina Spiegel-Rosing, The study of science, technology and society (SSTS): recent trends and future challenges’ in Spiegel-Rosing and Price, op. cit., pp. 7–42.
Salomon argues that it was only after World War II that there was both a “policy for science (the provision of an environment fostering research activities) and policy through science (the exploitation of discoveries and innovations in various sectors of government concern)” on a complementary basis (op. cit., pp. 45–48). However, the relationship between science and the state was sufficiently evident after World War I, particularly from the experience of the USSR, for J.D. Bernal to discern a future pattern in the relationship as early as 1939. (J. D. Bernal, The Social Function of Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1939 (re-issued by MIT Press, Cambridge, (Mass.), 1967)).
The notion of state capitalism was vital because it could ensure implementation of the economic change described in Rostow's ‘stages’ or Lewis' ‘turning points’, and make planned development feasible for third world countries (W. W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1960; W. Arthur Lewis, The Principles of Economic Planning, Dennis Dobson, London, 1949; W. Arthur Lewis, The Theory of Economic Growth, Allen and Unwin, London, 1955).
For example, J.D. Bernal, P.M.S. Blackett, M.J. Moravcsik, Don K. Price, Vannevar Bush, Stevan Dedijer, Michael Polanyi, Derek de Solla Price.
United Nations, Science and Technology for Development. Report of the United Nations Conference on the Application of Science and Technology for the Benefit of the Less Developed Areas (Geneva, 4-20 February 1963), (8 vols), United Nations, New York, 1963 (E/CONF. 39/63-I-21-28 [abbreviated herein as UNCSAT (1963)].
Unesco, National Science Policies in Countries of South and South-East Asia, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 3, Paris, 1965, p. 9.
idem.
ibid., p. 10.
United Nations (1963), op. cit., Vol. 1 ‘World of Opportunity’ (63-1-21), pp. 184–92.
ibid., pp. 184ff. The belief that no expenditure on science could be wasted was made very clear by Stevan Dedijer after UNCSAT, and widely accepted (Stevan Dedijer, ‘Underdeveloped Science in Underdeveloped Countries’, Minerva II(1) (Autumn 1963), pp. 61–81, especially p. 73).
R. M. Bell, ‘Approaches to national science policy’, a paper prepared for the ASEAN-EEC Seminar on Science and Technology Indicators and Science Policy, June 13-17 1983.
The immediate consequences of this can be gauged from Jacques Spaey et al., Science for Development: An essay on the origin and organization of national science policies, Unesco, Paris, 1971. The retrospective significance of the endorsement is shown, for example, by the World Bank's report to UNCSTD (1979) in Science and Technology in World Bank Operations, The World Bank, Washington, 1980; and by the United Nations, The Vienna Programme of Action on Science and Technology for Development, United Nations, New York, 1979.
The World Bank's ‘World Development Report’, published annually since 1978, has documented the problems with economic development now facing third world countries.
United Nations, Report of the United Nations Conference on Science and Technology for Development, Vienna (20-31 August 1979), United Nations, New York, 1979.
Ina Spiegel-Rösing, op. cit., pp. 16–19.
Unesco, Principles and Problems of National Science Policies, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 5, Paris, 1967, p. 7. The participants at this meeting were mostly from European and developed nations, only India represented the Asian region.
ibid., p. 87.
idem.
ibid., pp. 88–90; and Chapter 2, ‘Planning of scientific and technological policies’ in United Nations (1963), op. cit., Vol. III ‘Science and planning’, pp. 21–28.
See Resolution 6, Unesco (1967), op. cit., p. 88.
See for example, Unesco, Structural and Operational Schemes of National Science Policy, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 6, Paris, 1967; and Unesco, La Politico cientifica en America Latina, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 14, Montevideo, 1969.
Unesco, Science Policies in Countries of South and South-East Asia, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 3, Paris, 1965, Chapter 4. The 14 countries represented at the meeting were: Australia, Ceylon, Republic of China [Taiwan], Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Korea [Republic of Korea], Malaysia, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, and Viet-Nam.
For reasons of comparability and convenience, this infrastructure is reviewed using contemporary categories. See, for example, Unesco, Science and Technology in Countries of Asia and the Pacific. Policies, organization and resources, Unesco (Science Policy Studies and Documents), No. 52, Paris, 1985, (Annex A) p. 647.
Unesco (1965), op. cit., p. 18.
ibid., p. 17.
ibid., p. 18.
See United Nations (1963), op. cit., Vol. VI “Education and Training”, especially Chapter 1, pp. 9–29; and Unesco, Final Report. Conference on the Application of Science and Technology to the Development of Asia, Part I: Conclusions and Recommendations, New Delhi 9-20 August 1968, Unesco, Paris, 1969 [CASTASIA I (1968)], pp. 9–17.
STS (scientific and technological services), includes services such as scientific and technological information and documentation, library and museum facilities, translation services, surveying and routine testing, standardisation and quality control etc. See the definitions for STS and STET in Unesco (1985), op. cit., (Annex A) pp. 659ff.
An important example of this was seen in India's CSIR (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research) which for many years played a major part, nationally and internationally, in science and technology policy issues through its RSPO (Research, Survey and Planning Organisation which, in 1981, became NISTADS (National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies)).
Japan, however, reported an R&D funding level of 2 per cent of national income for 1962. Unesco (1965), op. cit., p. 16.
ibid., p. 17.
ibid., p. 15.
ibid, p. 19.
ibid., p. 15; and Gordon Claridge, Indonesia's Scientific Infrastructure, M.Sc. Thesis, Griffith University, 1983, pp. 94–98.
See the Country Reports to CASTASIA II (1982) in Unesco (1985), op. cit.
In 1985, 13 of the countries which attended CASTASIA II indicated that a slowing of industrial growth had not changed their immediate or long term development priorities from those reported at CASTASIA II in March, 1982.
See the ‘Regional overview’ in Unesco (1985), op. cit., pp. 9–20.
However in the case of very small countries, such as Samoa, Fiji, Singapore, Hong Kong or Papua New Guinea, the institutions are less specific in their policy-making functions. See the Country Reports in Unesco (1985), op. cit., passim.
See the Final Report of the CASTASIA II conference, Unesco (1983) op. cit.
National Science and Technology Authority, Operationalising the Demand-Pull Strategy in Science and Technology, NSTA, Planning Service, Manila [Philippines], April 10 1984, (Policy Forum No. 1, 1984 series).
See the Country Reports in Unesco (1985), op. cit.
See the Commission Reports and Final Report, Unesco (1983), op. cit., pp. 135ff.
R. Prebisch, The Economic Development of Latin America and its Principal Problems, United Nations, New York, 1950; A. G. Frank, Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1969; P. Baran, The Political Economy of Growth, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1957; S. Amin, Imperialism and Unequal Development, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1977.
This vast social science literature has been reviewed in two recent books: Vicky Randall and Robin Theobold, Political Change and Underdevelopment: A Critical Introduction to Third World Politics, Macmillan, London, 1985; and Ian Roxborough, Theories of Underdevelopment, Macmillan, London, 1979.
David Dickson, op. cit.; A.K.N. Reddy, Alternative Technology: A Viewpoint from India’, Social Studies of Science 5(1975), pp. 331–342.
The writings of A.K.N. Reddy, Ward Morehouse, or Frances Stewart (especially Technology and Underdevelopment, Macmillan, London, 1978), illustrate the nature and the significance of this attack.
The Lund Letter on Science, Technology and the Future, Research Policy Program (University of Lund), Lund (Sweden), December 1979, Letter No. 14+2; and Andrew Jamison, ‘UNCSTD — a matter of involvement’, New Scientist, Vol. 82(1158), 7 June 1979, pp. 830–31.
See, for example, the report of the Philippines’ NSTA in: Science and Technology for Development, Philippines Country Report, (A Review of Development in Science and Technology in the Philippines since 1979), prepared at the request of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia (ESCAP), National Science and Technology Authority, Manila, Philippines, May 1984.
See the CASTASIA II (1982) Final Report, Unesco (1983), op. cit.
India illustrates this changed public policy context for science policy. Baldev Raj Nayar, India's Quest for Technological Independence, Volume 1: Policy Foundation and Policy Change and Volume 2: The Results of Policy, Lancers Publishers, New Delhi, 1983, especially Chapters 2 and 4, Volume 1.
The dilemmas inherent in this area are identified and discussed in Tisdell's study of S&T policy in OECD countries. (C. A. Tisdell, Science and Technology Policy: Priorities of Governments, Chapman and Hall, London, 1981, especially pp. 69–71 and 202-3).
A. Rahman and S. Hill, CASTASIA II. Science, Technology and Development in Asia and the Pacific, Progress Report 1968-1980, Unesco (SC.82/CASTASIA II/Ref.1), Jakarta, 1983.
Social impact assessment (SIA) is one new method for identifying such problems (W. Derman and S. Whiteford (eds), Social Impact Analysis and Development Planning in the Third World, Westview Press, Boulder (Colorado), 1985).