While numerous definitions of science policy are often cited, there is general agreement that the term “science policy” may be defined as a set of statements expressing commitment by governments towards measures to be taken in order, on the one hand, to encourage the development of scientific and technical research and, on the other, to maximize benefits of their outcomes for sound socioeconomic development and environmental protection.[1], [2]
For the purpose of this podium, we interpret the term ‘science policy’ as including decisions related to enhancing scientific and technological research capabilities, experimental development, scientific and technological services and innovation. Decisions within such a policy, may take the form of statements or laws, normally including funding modalities. A good example is an act passed by New Zealand’s parliament with the aim of setting up specialized boards for funding STI activities as well as allocating expenses for the purposes of undertaking research in fields of science, technology and related activities.
As in the case of defining science, “science policy” may also be viewed both as an outcome and a process. Its utility as an outcome is manifested in the manner with which various concerned parties will use it in implementing socioeconomic development related decisions. While as a process “science policy” will allow for collective learning processes and debates concerning the state science, technology and innovation at the national level, which, if managed properly, ought to result in advancing the welfare of nations, their links to countries in their vicinity and across the globe as well as measurable benefits for their surrounding and global environmental concerns.
Science policy, unlike science is not objective. It does not follow the scientific method. It deals with the positive effects that science and technology can have on society. It is in fact a result of multiple influences and sometimes contradictory interests. Ideally, science policy actors include policy-makers from both the executive and legislative branches, scientists and scientific associations and institutions as well as parties concerned with policy implementation. Other players such as civil society and science journalists also play a role.
In summary, a given science, technology and innovation policy consists of a set of principles and methods, coupled to legislative and executive provisions needed in order to stimulate, mobilize and organize a country’s or a region’s scientific, technological and innovation potential as well as strategies and executive plans needed in order to implement policy directives. Processes and actors involved in making decision and taking actions as well as factors that may influence those decisions and actions ought to be clearly defined within any policy document.
A close look at the current state of Science and Technology (S&T) in the Arab countries leaves little doubt that there is a need for an in-depth review of the sector, with the objective of creating a strong Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) base. It is true that some Arab countries have formulated new STI policies, however, the majority have not subjected their system to a systematic review during the last ten years.
The world is witnessing breath-taking breakthroughs and technological advances, which would certainly change the health and wealth of nations. Inthe face of these important changes emanating from the current political, economic and security concerns, the Arab countries must prepare themselves by adopting ambitious policies, strategies and plans to become part of the global knowledge society. The Arab countries need to adopt, collectively and individually a clear vision and well-defined policies with precise targets to put the country (is) on the path for achieving excellence Science and Technology.
Governments, in all the Arab countries, recognize the vital role that Science and Technology can play in the economic development of their countries. This can be verified by reading their science policy documents. However, these policies are not always implemented. In most cases, these policies are often designed by international consultants and treated as an “academic exercise”. To illustrate this point, it suffices to note that all the Arab States adopted a decision, back in 1976, in Rabat, to allocate 1% of their GDP for R&D. Until this very moment, nota single Arab country implemented this decision. On possible explanation is that this target is unrealistic. Another reason may be the be the lack of well-trained policy analysts who could assume the task of reviewing, assessing, monitoring and evaluating existing policies and formulate new policies with realistic goals and objectives.
1.1. STI for Policy and Policy for STI
There are two main facets of STI policies: Science, technology and innovation for Policy and policy for science, technology and innovation. Other facets, such as STI for society, STI for development, STI for industrial development, STI and the private sector, etc. influence and be influenced by government policy.
1.1.1. STI for policy
This facet deals with the deployment of STI in pre-determined priority areas, the implementation of which is likely to contribute to the national development agenda. In the past, countries, based on their own means, formulated STI visions, then development goals and objectives in the form of national development plans. However, in 2015, the international community including all member-countries of the United Nations, rich and poor, scientifically-advanced or scientifically lagging, agreed on a common shared 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) and 169 Targets. Policy-makers now consider these goals when formulating their STI policies. Given that arriving at all SDGs requires scientific input, many countries have now started to take this into consideration when formulating their STI objectives.
1.1.2. Policy for STI
This facet covers measures taken by the public and private sectors, which cover a wide spectrum of activities with the aim of building national capacity in STI including, but not limited to, human resources development, institution building, R&D funding etc. Thus, policies designed for these purposes would need to include facilitating research and knowledge production activities carried out by all concerned institutions within a given country.
1.2. Policy Types
In the UNESCO Manuals, one finds reference to four distinct policy types:
1.2.1. Science policy: relates to promoting scientific research, selection of scientific objectives and goals consistent with national plans or strategies, setting norms to govern the ways and means by which science is developed, transferred and applied, gathering, organizing and deploying resources required to pursue the selective objectives as well as monitoring and evaluating the results obtained from applying the policy. The following are therefore among the most important questions dealt with by STI policy-makers:
(a) establishing and strengthening government structures and mechanisms for planning, budgeting, coordinating, managing and promoting scientific research activities as well as the dissemination and implementation of their outcomes;
(b) gathering, processing and analysing basic data concerning the national scientific potential, including data on ongoing research, monitoring national scientific development and ensuring the smooth growth of the institutional infrastructure for scientific research and the dissemination and implementation of their outcomes;
(c) maintaining proper balance between the various types of research (fundamental, applied, experimental development), supporting the development of a creative national scientific community and setting standards for the status of scientific researchers in conformity with their responsibilities and rights, including intellectual property rights linked to the outcome of scientific research activities that they conduct;
(d) optimizing human, financial, institutional and informational resources to achieve the objectives established by the national STI policy;
(e) assessing and promoting productivity, relevance, quality, effectiveness of national research and scientific and technological services in various sectors of performance, including higher education, government institutions, business enterprise, private non-profit, as well as removing organizational and managerial obstacles encountered in the execution of scientific research activities;
(f) initiating appropriate legislative action in relation to the impact on the individual, society or the natural environment of the application of scientific discoveries and their implementation as embodied within inventions and innovative products and services;
(g) evaluating the economic profitability and social utility as well as harmful effects of the results of scientific research activities and their implementation.
Although this list is not exhaustive, it does indicate key areas for which government policy-makers are primarily responsible, with each individual issue requiring the design of an operational policy instrument.
1.2.2. Engineering policies: the roles of engineers embody endeavours that comprise the utilization of established engineering practices for sound socioeconomic development. This will often require formulation of sound policy directives primarily intended to regulate the use of engineering knowledge in a manner that guarantees positive outcomes for the country as a whole, rather than selected actors. In many cases, the development and implementation of requisite regulations will necessitate both in-depth understanding of engineering principles as well as how engineering practices interacts with social and natural systems.
1.2.3. Technology policies: A fundamental premise upon which technology policies must rest is that they seek to improve social welfare and economic performance. This will essentially require influencing the rate and direction of technological change as well as securing the means for optimal acquisition, adaptation and dissemination of specific technologies. The conventional entry point for analysing issues pertaining to changes targeted by technology policies is to identify the conditions needed for their influence to be inclusive, sustainable and superior to the outcome of ordinary market competition.[3] These conditions, in turn, require further examination of the feasibility and methods for such intervention, including the question of what government interventions are necessary to improve social welfare. Succinctly stated, government intervention would be necessary if profit-seeking actors underperformed or performed poorly in acquiring, producing or disseminating technological inputs from the perspective of attaining profits without due attention to likely deleterious effects in terms of social, health or environmental impacts.
The development and implementation of relevant regulations and laws require (a) technical understanding of the functioning of these artefacts and (b) adequate understanding of how this technology interacts with social and natural systems, and would benefit from the involvement of technical experts. Issues addressed by engineering and technology policies cover a vast scope in terms of specialisations as well as areas of implementation. They are global in nature and include water conservation, energy, transportation, communication, food production, habitat protection, disaster risk reduction, technology assessment and the deterioration of infrastructure systems.
All of the above issues will need to be addressed while maintaining close attention to citizens’ rights and meeting the needs and desires of a growing world population and the challenges posed by climate change environmental degradation in many parts of the world.
1.2.4. Innovation and innovation policies: While very many definitions may be found for innovation in current literature, the principal theme addressed by most inclusive policies concerns innovation as a tool for disrupting prevailing patterns in production and services sectors in a manner that promotes economic growth, generates enterprises and reduces poverty. Innovation as a means for reducing poverty in particular gained momentum since the mid-2000s due to initiatives taken by international aid and philanthropic organisations.
The notion of innovation policy in support of implementing the outcomes of research, as well as a variety of scientific and technological inputs with view to enhancing the performance of a variety of sectors, owes its popularity to later days during the 1990’s.
Several Arab States have now included innovation as an essential component within their STI policies. The trend towards establishing incubation schemes in some of the Arab States constitutes a concrete example of growing awareness of the role that innovative capabilities may have upon socioeconomic development. Nevertheless, it would also seem that many Arab States are still struggling with ways and means of involving private firms in the production and services sectors to actively take part in nationwide schemes aimed at the adoption of innovation as backbone of their activities.
It is here too that policy makers would be well advised to look as closely as possible at the experiences of countries and regions that succeeded in bringing innovation to the fore within their policy schemes, and reaped concrete and widespread socioeconomic benefits as a result.
Innovation policy may be classified in various ways, such as by distinguishing between ‘supply-side’ and ‘demand-side’ policy, or between ‘mission-oriented’ and ‘diffusion oriented’ policies. Policy instruments include financial instruments, e.g. tax credits, export incentives, soft loans, etc. and regulatory instruments such as laws and binding regulations, e.g. the use of safety equipment for children in cars. Innovation may be characterized, inter alia, by: the type of innovation – technological (product and process) or non-technological (organizational and marketing); the type of socio-economic impact it would have; whether it involves large groups of professionals, engineers, scientists, business community, or the general public at large.
In addition to the above policy types, it is essential to recognise that crosscutting policy recommendations have been issued over the past decades by concerned international organisations, particularly UNESCO with the intention of promoting the status of scientific researchers, maintaining the integrity of their activities and ensuring that they eventually serve human development. Such documents are exemplified by the relatively recent document (UNESCO 2017) issued in 2017. [4] The section titled “Safeguarding the status of STI personnel” within Chapter 6, presents further consideration of this document and its implications.
1.3. The STI Policy Cycle
The policy cycle analysis is a full description of the formal and informal means of formulating and implementing STI policies in the country or sector in question, including specific analysis of the following issues.
1.3.1. Agenda setting: refers to the process by which problems related to STI and the linkages between STI and both society and the economy come to the government’s attention. Agenda setting is also a socially- constructed process, in which actors and institutions, influenced by respective realities and ideologies, play a fundamental role in determining which problems or issues require government action.[5] This can be part of a wider process such as the design of a national development strategy or plan.
1.3.2. Policy formulation: refers to the process by which STI policy options are formulated by the government. Policy formulation involves identifying and assessing possible solutions to policy problems, weighing their pros and cons, and deciding which should be accepted and which rejected or modified. The relationship between the government and social actors thus exerts a significant influence on the formulation of public policies.
1.3.3. Decision-making: refers to the process by which governments adopt a particular course of action, by and between actors concerned with the policy’s implementation and its outcomes.
1.3.4. Policy implementation: refers to processes whereby governments as well as concerned bodies, within the private as well as non-governmental sectors, put STI policies into effect. This is when decisions are carried out, through government directives as well as actions taken by other concerned parties, including concerned nongovernmental organisations, trade federations and professional associations, with the aimed of at implementing STI policies, in order to tackle current problems as well as reach out towards set future goals.
1.5.4. Monitoring and Evaluation of Policy Outcomes: refers to the process by which the results of STI policies are monitored by both government and societal actors. The result may be a re-conceptualization of policy problems and solutions, in which the effectiveness, efficiency and continuing appropriateness of policies and policy instruments are re-assessed, and the results fed back into another round of agenda-setting.
1.4. Policy Frameworks and Generations
Conceptual frameworks upon which science policies are formulated evolved over time from what is known as the Linear Model of Innovation, towards most recently used models including the National Innovation System (NIS), as well as the Knowledge Based Economy (KBE) and the Information Society (IS).
The following paragraphs will examine the three commonly recognised generations of policy models as grouped Benoit Godin.[6]
1.4.1. First Generation; the linear model
The Linear Model, also referred to as cultural gaps, assumes that innovation occurs in a sequential manner (time lags) starting with research, inventions and commercialization. This model has been in use for more than 60 years and is still in use by some policy analysts and economists. See Figure (1).
| Figure (1); The Linear Model |
1.4.2. Second Generation; the dynamic model
| Figure (2); A dynamic and parallel model of research [7] |
Developed in order to account for protracted economic growth and enhanced industrial competitiveness, this conceptual framework fleshed out the linear model on the bases of statistical correlations, firstly between research and economic growth, secondly between research, technological development and productivity, and thirdly between research and technology and innovation, and industrial competitiveness. See Figure (2).
1.4.3. Third Generation; knowledge and information economies and societies
| Frame (1); The Information Society The information society and economy, as a concept was conceived to take into account major structural changes to modern economies due to inputs created within the domains of information and communications technologies over the past few decades, in particular. Infrastructures created and maintained with view to managing information have largely been considered as core resources of national competitiveness in various sectors of economic activity, in general and in scientific research, technological development and innovation, in particular. In essence, the need to implement comprehensive strategies to connect, share and trade both domestic and foreign information at the national level, has never been greater as the globalization of STI information infrastructures deepens and becomes more widespread. |
A framework taking into account the notions of knowledge and information based economies and societies was proposed by the OECD, implying that research is not conducted in universities only, but is a result of the interaction and flow of knowledge, information and collaboration among and between academia, researchers, government and industry involved in the innovation processes. This framework has now been adopted by most countries developed and developing and helped focus STI policies objectives of building knowledge-based economies and national innovation systems and ensuring that they functions as interacting networks. In other words, having infrastructure and adequate human resources is often insufficient; what is also needed is to ensure that the various component of STI systems, including government decision-making bodies, the universities and industry continually interact as well as share information and knowledge with components of the national STI system.
The OECD defined knowledge-based economies as “economies which are directly based on the production, distribution and use of knowledge and information”. While, the question on how to measure the knowledge economy has posed some difficulties, the OECD came up with two concepts:
1. Investment in knowledge: defined as the total “expenditures directed towards activities with the aim of enhancing existing knowledge and/or acquiring new knowledge or diffusing knowledge.” More specifically, this meant the overall expenditure on R&D, higher education and software.
2. Knowledge-based industries defined as those that had the following three characteristics:
– A high level of investment in innovation,
– Intensive use of acquired technology, and
– A highly educated workforce.
Frame (1) presents a concise definition of the information society while sections in Chapter 5 present further information regarding indicators used in measuring progress towards establishing an information society.
The OECD has also developed a complex set of indicators in what is called a” scoreboard.” The present Guide adopts the view, however, that for formulating national policies the concepts of knowledge-based economy (KBE) and the national system of innovation (NSI) are based on the same economic premises of growth, productivity, competitiveness and profitability, with emphasis on inclusive and sustainable development.
Scientific Research and Experimental Development
The definition of scientific research and experimental development (R&D) evolved over time. Thus, in its 1979 introduction to science policy analysis[8] UNESCO defined in the following terms.
- Scientific and technological research (STR) is the study, experimentation, conceptualization and theory testing involved in making discoveries or developing new applications.
- Experimental development (ED) consists of processes of adaptation, testing and refinement that lead to practical applicability.
- Scientific and technological services (STS) represent a mixed group of activities crucial to the progress of research and to the practical application of science and technology. These services are normally designed to achieve the collection, processing and dissemination of scientific and technological information needed for such purposes. See Frame (2).
- Innovation involves the development of a new product or process with view to their effective utilisation in the national economy. In essence, innovation may also be thought of as including “transfer of technology” through the introduction of products or processes into countries in which they were previously unknown. Deliberate attempts to promote the diffusion and propagation of innovations throughout the productive sectors of the economy are sometimes considered in this category.
These definitions have now evolved to embody the universally accepted notions detailed below.
| Frame (2); Scientific and technical services conducted by specialised agencies • Scientific and technical education and training (STET) • Scientific and technical information services, • General purpose data collection, • Testing and standardization, • Feasibility studies, • Specialized health care, • Patent and licensing activities, • Policy-related studies, • Routine software development, • Other industrial activities, • Other innovation activities, • Production and related technical activities, • Administration and other supporting activities, • Translation and editing of S&T literature. |
2.1. Defining research and development (R&D)
The term R&D covers three activities: basic research, applied research and experimental development. Basic research is defined as experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundations of phenomena and observable facts, without any application or use in view. Applied research is also concerned with original investigations undertaken to acquire new knowledge. However, it is directed primarily towards specific practical aims or objectives.
On the other hand, experimental development is systematic work, drawing on existing knowledge gained from research and/or practical experience, which is directed towards producing new materials, products or devices, to installing new processes, systems and services, or to substantially improving those already produced or installed. R&D covers both formal activities undertaken within R&D units and informal or occasional activities carried out in other units.
2.2. Scientific and Technological Activities (STA)
As referred to earlier, UNESCO developed the broader concept of STA and included it in its “Recommendation concerning the International Standardization of Statistics on Science and Technology” (UNESCO, 1978).[9] In addition to R&D, scientific and technological activities comprise scientific and technological services (STS) listed in Frame (2) above.
2.2.1. R&D and Technological Innovation
Innovation is defined in the Oslo Manual[10] as “the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization or external relations”. To cater for the needs of the developing countries by taking into consideration the process of innovation, UNESCO recommended an annex to the Oslo Manual. This addition considered innovation as the result of advanced R&D activities that lead to new industrial products and services, as well as the result of new marketing or work organization methods in business practices.
2.2.2. R&D Administration and other Supporting Activities
To carry out the R&D activities described above, funds must be provided, and properly managed. R&D funding by policy agencies, such as ministries of science and technology or research councils, do not constitute R&D. In the case of in-house management of R&D projects, their financing and related services, a distinction is made between direct support for R&D activities by managers closely associated with particular research activities and persons such as financial or procurement staff. Where costs related to the first group of workers are included in both the personnel and expenditure series, while costs incurred in relation to the second group is included as indirect or auxiliary expenditures and only as an element of overhead costs. Auxiliary support by catering or transport services are also included as overhead costs.
2.2.3. Actors in the Performance of R&D
R&D is performed by many entities in the innovation system; these entities may include:
• Universities and academic sector institutions;
• Public research institutes;
• Public agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and non-profit foundations;
• Research units within the private sector.
UNESCO Cairo Office is willing and able to undertake training sessions for those experts who would like to receive capacity building in the field of STI Policy Development. Please use the form below to register your request for training. Thank you.