Grassroot science and the responsibility of scientists in technology generation

Science and technology are undoubtedly an important part in the growth of many western nations. However, the idea that these two result in an overall better quality of life is not necessarily exportable to other regions of the world with other cultural backgrounds. Considerable evidence shows that the incorporation of this idea to the developmental policies of less developed countries is unfruitful as an average. But, in view of the fact that we cannot disregard science for it has an impressive potential, we must find new materializations of this activity, congruent with the demands and possibilities of non-western nations. And at the root of the problem, in the particular case of Latin America, we find that a redefinition of the ideological principles of science (that is, its ethos) is a natural path to follow for the nearby future. I. Technology and development in perspective For many years, countless authors have treated technology as an imperative for growth. Extensive literature beholding this idea has been around for more than one century, indeed, since the first decades of the industrial revolution (Boserup, E. 1984). During this vast 200 year period, this ideology has permeated the structure of numerous institutions and, in particular, is presently a core element of policies emanated from intergovernmental agencies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (Viniergra, G. 2000). Even in the case of scientific enterprises, the causal idea that ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 2 technology, generated by scientific research, leads to a better society is in the foundations of groups such as the British and American Associations for the Advancement of Science as in many of the units and activities of other scientific organizations (Pardo-Guerra, J.P. 2003). And though a vast quantity of evidence points at the non-sustainability of this model, numerous researchers still go as far as to state that "technological change [...] lies in the heart of economic growth" (Romer, P.M. 1990). This asseveration is, however, extremely limited in its applicability. Certainly, countries such as the United States, England, Germany and France, cribs of the industrial revolution, experienced a dramatic change in the quality of life as a result of technological advancements. Furthermore, similar impacts have been reported in other countries that at the turn of the 19th century were still submerged in pre-industrial economies and that gained considerable benefits from high-tech industrialization. Japan is a paradigmatic case of this process, although South Korea is also a particularly insightful example. Nonetheless, in a world suffering the consequences of a bittersweet development where billions have no access to the most basic services, vast regions of the planet remain far from seeing the technological advances we take for granted. An equally disturbing situation is the abuse that accompanied the technological boom of the last three decades. As an illustration, considerable regions of Mexico, Central America and Asia experienced since the late 1980s a surge in the mass production of manufacturing goods, brought by the increased market demand of the economic bubble of the 1990s (de Medeiros, C. 2002.). Though this had a positive impact in the macroeconomic variables of the majority of the nations involved, this process was also associated to severe income problems, a deep technological deficit and widespread deterioration of the social tissue. In this group we find the expansion of the maquila industry in the US-Mexico border, as it is a source of growing discrimination in the workplace (Resource Net, 2003), an embedded widespread surge in localized violence (Baynton, D. 2003), and a constant cycle of unsustainable market dependencies (Gerber, J. 2001). Even in the United States, the economy that has collected the paramount fruits of technologic innovation, recent evidence points at the existence of problems of wealth distribution as a product of the growth of the technology-based service sector (Alic, J. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 3 2001). Rephrasing Romer, technological change lies in the heart of economic growth, but only of those who control it. Behind this polarized development we can distinguish a number of fundamental invariables. However, as a foremost, the working definitions of science and technology are behind most of these since they are an obligated reference for the elaboration of industrial and scientific policies in less developed countries. In fact, the policies that part from the definition of technology currently managed by most of Latin America's governments rely on Western notions of advancement and some peculiar theories such as Kusnetz's inverted U hypothesis. This, along with a sharp historic background void of knowledge based societies (), resulted in a high grade of technological dependence. This is not only a product of inadequate policies, since it is in great extent fuelled by the uncompromised attitudes of important factions of the governmental, academic and business sectors alike. Examples on the triumphs and failures of these three are extensive and frequent in specialized literature (Casas, R. and Luna, M; 1997; Kim, L. and Nelson, R. (eds.); 2000; Boldu, JL and De la Fuente, JR (eds.); 1993). Still, due to the scope of this paper, I shall only focus on the case of academia for it is an aspect of technologic development seldom studied in comparison to the economic and governmental dimensions of the problem. II. Latin American scientific community and technologic innovation: difficulties of an odd context Science and technology are invariably linked, and it is therefore inevitable to analyze the role and state of scientific enterprises before assessing technological policies. And since in Latin America the biggest portion of research is conducted in the academic domain (Vessuri, H. 1994), I shall equate the development of science as a whole to the development of academic, university-based science. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 4 Latin America experienced an unusual scientific development if compared to regions such as North America and Western Europe (Vessuri, H. 1994). Though historically we can attribute this to the early independence of the major territories, the chaotic political dynamics of Latin America were, for more than a century, a considerable factor in the imperfect forging of scientific institutions, a structural premise for any brand of scientific and technological development. In fact, the orthodox theory of development gives us a satisfactory account of the problems which lead to the current scientific and technological setback of the region. And in this sense, the most important aspect is the one regarding accumulation of capital. For a great part of the 19th century, what is now Mexico, Brazil and Argentina (the three most important economies in the region), did not reach the critical levels of economic growth required to start important R&D initiatives. This is a vastly documented fact and still an important element in the policies and discourses of many Latin American countries. Nevertheless, classic economic theory does not explain the counted periods of economic expansion during which science did not blossom. In the case of Mexico, we can identify at least two such periods in the last century, namely the so-called "Mexican Miracle" (1950s-1960s) and the high-tech roar of the 1990s. The former is quite appropriate since, though there was an increased governmental support for science and a considerable stability in macroeconomic terms, there was little impact on knowledge generation, especially in the applied areas. A brief explanation might be found in the influence of some old-school ideas in the governmental realm. For instance, recognizing that Mexico possesses a deep deficit of highly qualified professionals, the administration of Vicente Fox proposed the formation of 8000 PhD's over a 6 year period accompanied with a doubling of the federal R&D expenditure, going from 0.4% of the GDP to about 1.0%. However, this programme conditioned these two measures to an annual growth of above 5.0% of the GDP (PECyT, 2001). With current growth rates of less than 2.0%, dooming predictions by the Central Bank and the top-ranking investment firms reconsidering their predictions for the next five years, policy limitations 1 An early independence delayed the creation of specialized scientific societies. This can be seen in the preponderance of Academy-like organizations over other forms of scientific management for the bigger part of the 19th century (Cetto, AM; Alonso-Gamboa, O. 1998). 2 After market liberalization, Mexico became an important economy due the economic spill of the increased commercial ties with the US and Europe. Currently it is ranked in number 9 with a GDP of around $618 billion dollars. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 5 like this one will clearly perpetuate the deficiencies in the area of scientific research. Sadly, harmful policy-induced cycles like this one are typical in Latin American counties: governments acknowledge the role of technologic innovation but limit the total expenditure and hence the generation of research facilities and trained professionals afterwards expecting these to generate economic growth despite the absence of capital. But even with considerable support from governments, science and technology promoting policies in the region tend to have very weak results (Velho, L. Saenz, T. 2002). Despite the burden of responsibility that we might associate to the governments' less than adequate actions, a big part of the problem is, in fact, in hands of the local scientific community. Since the late 1940s, this sector has fallen into a closed dynamic of university-based research and has failed in many aspects of the day-to-day relation with its immediate social surroundings. Evidence of this can be obtained in the specific case of physical sciences (Pardo-Guerra, JP. 2003). Contrary to the average western case (the American Physical Society and Institute of Physics, for example), Latin American physical societies conduct only infrequently activities aimed at resource formation (on all levels, from primary school to in situ workplace training) and policymaking. Indeed, not only are these organizations restricted to a purely academic ambiance; they are also unlikely to open interdisciplinary study groups like those found in the APS and IOP (for instance, the Forum on International Physics supported by the latter). Things are even worse from the wider institutional perspective. The low participation of the Latin American scientific community in the elaboration of regional R&D policies has positioned many countries in a constant state of long-term technological instability. Almost all the science and technology ministries of Latin American countries depend directly on the executive branch and have very little continuity in their policies (To see this suffices to review the appointment process of the high-ranking officials of science and technology in countries such as Mexico, Brazil and Argentina. In most of the cases the scientific community has no word in the election process, counter to the United States, where the National Academies have an important opinion in the selection process for the director of the 3 Recently, some scientific organizations have initiated programmes aimed at a the social problem in Latin America. A quite interesting one is the "Ciencia en tu escuela" programme (Science in your school), supported by the Mexican Academy of Sciences, directed at educating primary and secondary school teachers in scientific areas. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 6 National Science Foundation). Even if intelligent policies are initiated, these rarely have a long survival rate. Yet, the participation of the scientific community in policymaking is not in itself a guarantee of successful development. This can be illustrated, once again, by the case of Mexico. Due to the centralization of government, academy and industry infrastructures in the central region of Mexico, most of this country's science and technology policy of the last 20 years has been developed from and for the centre by small well-identified academic groups. A report by the Science and Technology Commission of the lower chamber of the Mexican Congress shows that this has manifested in a harsh contrast between the researchers that work in Mexico City's metropolitan area (concentrating 50% of the country's research facilities) and those working in the interior: whereas the first are more interested in highly theoretical problems and what is locally referred to as "first world science", the second are more preoccupied in immediate problems such as pollution, water supply and agricultural sustainability (CCyT, 2000). All points at the idea that the concept of science that impregnates many researchers in Latin America, regardless of its historical origin, is not an adequate one to solve the technological problems that spread across the region. Undoubtedly, a new paradigm for science for Latin America is necessary at the very least, more so if we intend to see successful policies in the nearby future. III. The fundamental works of science: Merton and beyond This notion of a science for less developed countries is not new in any way (Mytelka, L. 2001). Many authors have treated it before, however with a lukewarm reception in the scientific community. Very few countries and academic organizations have embraced the fresh notions and definitions of science in the elaboration of developmental programmes. Despite this, in the unhurriedly growing set of successful cases, the overall benefits are 4 This last topic is especially insightful for the research groups based in the centre are largely proponents of biotechnological fixes contrary to those located in the periphery who opt for more sustainable and less invasive techniques such as intercropping. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 7 good. Not only is there a profound impact in the quality of life, but also there is considerable generation of knowledge, especially in highly interdisciplinary and complex areas. Some experiences in Asia, particularly in India, have proven that new forms of involvement of the scientific community with its social surroundings can have many short term benefits that surpass the classical notions of what research can achieve. Behind this process we are actually observing a modification of the ideological foundations of science. With an increasing frequency, scientists are starting to recognize the significant value of indigenous knowledge and the adaptive nature of technologies in different cultural contexts. To some extent, these new forms of science defy the traditional notions of Robert Merton and John Ziman in the sense that they have a distinctive ethos that does not fall in any existing category (mainly, CUDOS and PLACE, referring to academic and industrial science, respectively (Borsen Hansen, T. 2003)). However, this change of perspective has yet to influence mainstream research and education efforts, especially in developing countries that tend to use western models as measuring parameters. Under the light of recent political events in the region, it is thus occasion to surpass some of our conceptual limitations and reach novel paradigms of development, technology and science, this time considering polygonal aspects such as cultural, social and environmental sustainability. And this should be a matter of all, not only scientists and technicians, but in fact a democratic endeavour involving all sectors of society. IV. Grassroot science: an integrated approach We have now reached the point of defining a new model for development, or at least a reasonable substitute for the one that pervades some Latin American academic circles. This model must therefore tackle the chief problems of the region, namely the low levels of coordination between the scientific community and its socio-political surroundings and, with more immediate economic outpours, of local technologic innovation problematic. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 8 Readapting the concept of science's ethos, we can define a set of values for a different kind of science, similar to the one carried on in several socially-involved projects around the world. Thus, GRASS-root science, as we could call this socially-involved form of science, is given by the following fundamental aspects: • Global approach to complex problems: Grassroot scientists are brought up in a multidisciplinary environment. This requires a high level of networking among the scientific institution, especially those which are in theory highly democratic and participative (such as scientific societies). This has a direct impact in the formation of interregional research facilities (Mytelka, L. 2001) and of the curricular programmes in local universities. (Inter-Disciplinary) • Regional scope of interest. Although the tools are universal, the analysis is conducted from a local perspective (think global act local). Furthermore, just as scientists and scientific organizations, knowledge should also be networked with groups that seek similar goals and that have similar ideas, including local civil grassroot organizations. (¡Ya Basta!) • Acknowledgment of the surrounding social environment, its particular needs and indigenous awareness: Grassroot science is particulary interested in the needs of the public since it finds economic and moral support in the needs of the general population. (Public Opinion) • Sensitivity towards cultural diversity. Grassroot science does not believe that the high-tech road is the best road, especially if there are alternative options that do not compromise the local social tissue. For instance, in some regions intercropping coupled with better transportation mechanisms is clearly a better option than chemical-dependent genetically modified organisms (Social Responsibility) • Social involvement. Grassroot scientists recognize themselves as members of a bigger social structure and therefore seek a constant interaction with their surroundings through knowledge diffusion (capacity building), early education and involvement in policymaking. (Idealistic) 5 The italicized words in parenthesis refer to Tom Borsen's ISYP Ideal science (Borsen Hansen, T. 2003) ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 9 V. An operational approach A natural question that follows this definition regards the operational aspects of this new type of science. Clearly, a change in the way of doing science (implied in its ethos) requires a considerable modification of the governmental and academic institutions that guard research. And, in this sense, the "institutionalization of grassroot science" requires as a first step some deep socio-political changes effectively directed at the regional level of governance. Since the discussion in this topic can be quite extensive, I shall limit myself to focalizing some of the aspects I consider important in a small number of points. However, to clarify a bit more this section, I will divide these into three sections related to the international, the national and the regional/state domains of competence. V.I International policies and their sources • International organizations such as those incorporated into the United Nations System should focus more efforts in the establishment of interregional agreements on science policy with the following characteristics: 1) aimed at a long-term continuity (breaking the "one-term" dynamics of science/technology policy in less developed countries); 2) seeking a drastic decrease in the technological trade balance not of countries but of "regions of equivalence" (for instance, southern Mexico and Central America should be considered a single region due to the similarity of circumstances); 3) establishing regional research facilities out of the bureaucratic context of many less developed countries (for instance, financed with UN funds in such a way that the researchers do not depend on stipends from local scientific institutions); 4) funding interregional educational exchanges from the lowest levels possible (to break the technocratic cycle of policymaking); 5) working with local NGOs in identifying alternative solutions to old-time problems. V.II National science policies • The governments of less developed countries should consider undergoing structural changes directed at: 1) linking the scientific community with their social ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003 10 surroundings by means of primary and secondary educational programmes; 2) promoting science education in all levels and from a holistic point of view (including the increase of sections devoted to science in mass media such as newspapers and television); 3) stimulate the incursion of students into basic and applied areas of knowledge; 4) promote the forging of strong democratic scientific institutions (i.e. scientific societies) and of regional and interregional networks of peer-reviewed publications; 5) extend the number of financial aids for small and medium knowledgebased commercial enterprises; 6) regionalize the R&D expenditure according to needs and demands and decentralize human resources by the formation broad national university systems; 7) give the scientific community voice and vote (democratize science); 8) encourage low-cost, highly-effective remedies to local problems; 9) generate national databases on projects, people and publications in science for the use of academic and industrial networking. V.III Regional strategies • Regional governments (such as those corresponding to states, provinces and cities) also have a responsibility. They should: 1) establish links with the regional scientific/technologic research facilities; 2) promote the formation of scientists and highly trained professionals within their community; 3) create grant-like programmes for solving local problems. ISYP CONFERENCE “Advancing Human Security” Halifax, Nova Scotia July 15-17 2003