Precious papers from 'non-research-intensive' countries.

Countries vary greatly with respect to total expenditure as well as the fraction of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) they invest in science (Jaffe et al., 2013). Poor countries spend very little because government revenues are small and scientific research tends to be seen as a luxury in comparison with education, health care, infrastructure development, debt repayment and even military spending. Some wealthy countries spend relatively little on science for historical or cultural reasons (Serageldin, 2008). The meagre public funds allocated for scientific research in such 'non-research-intensive' (NRI) countries should therefore be regarded as precious – much more so than money spent by research-intensive (RI) countries that invest greater fractions of much larger GDPs. Given this, it has been heartwarming to witness the increasing number of papers from NRI countries published in The Journal of Experimental Biology (JEB). However, the number submitted from these countries each year remains relatively low and their acceptance rates fall far below those of submissions from RI countries. Low submission and acceptance rates are seen even among NRI countries that have significantly increased investment in science in recent years. It is not unusual to hear the view expressed that western scientific journals display bias against submissions from NRI countries. Low submission and acceptance rates merit discussion but it is necessary to do this in a broad context. An empirical question addressed in the social sciences concerns the relationship between research performance and level of economic development. In general, as one goes up, so does the other. But what causal factors drive this relationship? A related set of questions concerns the extent to which greater investment in science might promote economic growth or human well-being (Jaffe et al., 2013). These do not come only from such things as semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and high-yield crops. It has been argued that scientific literacy as well as the development of critical, evidence-based thinking contribute to the strengthening of democratic institutions (Sagan, 1995). Throughout human history, more inclusive, pluralistic political systems have set the stage for economic development and elevated standards of living (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). Because it has come to be expected that scientific enterprise should benefit society and that public funds should be well spent, the governments of RI countries implement various means to ensure that only high-quality science gets funded. In addition, scientists are held accountable for the research money that they spend. Given the dearth (and, therefore, …