Re: Roger Posadas comments on PNoy’s science policy insults scientists 3

TO: 3 More3 recipients CC: 14 recipientsYou 14 More Hide Details FROM: • Flor Lacanilao TO: • PhilScience@yahoogroups.com • philmarsci@yahoogroups.com • taxo2006@yahoogroups.com CC: • Roger Posadas • mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph • eqjavier@yahoo.com • plicuanan@yahoo.com • fredpascual@yahoo.com • edpadlan@yahoo.com • raul_suarez@lifesci.ucsb.edu • Romeo Santos • caesar.saloma@gmail.com • jose magpantay • Rafael Rodriguez • Erlinda Echanis • Edison Cruz • Rolando Dayco • 9 More... Message flagged Thursday, July 28, 2011 8:06 AM

Message body

(See Attachment for comments of K Primavera, B Vallejo, and J Oclarit on Roger Posadas commentary) ----------------------------Alam ko na, Roger, isang dahihlan kung bakit hindi tayo magka-intindi-han. So I will try the personal approach this time -- talk about us rather than what we say -- credibility. My main concern has always been the future Filipino scientists. 1. We are debating science and technology in a science forum. But you cite books by social scientists. The book authors you cited here (and others in previous discussions), Linsu Kim and Alice

Amsden, are well published in journals covered in Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI); but none in Science Citation Index (SCI). These ISI indexes cover all high-impact journals. 2. Your focus is using technology for development regardless of research, citing social science books; I focus on improving research to develop capability to generate and use technologies, citing science journal articles. The practice reflects research habits. Baka pareho tayong tama -- sa social science ka, sa science ako. 3. But I can't find any research and viewpoint papers where you are sole or first author, published in SSCI or SCI journals, to support your academic functions or to make credible commentaries. As a professor of physics says, How Can We Have Science Literacy Without Literate Scientists? I have enough of them -- research papers & invited editorial; sole, first, coauthor, and last authorship -- published in 7 journal titles covered in SCI, including a research paper in Science as sole author. They boost my credibility, back my views, and give out reliable information (education) -- for those who want to learn. 4. In your 10 years as science dean at UP Diliman, whereas the number of PhDs in the college faculty increased twofold, the percentage of SCI-indexed papers produced per PhD decreased from 15% to 5% of total (Celebrating the UP Centennial). They lowered the academic standard in teaching, graduate training, research, and outreach. They tell a story why we are unable to move forward (see also, Problems preventing academic reforms, and Google "Science in 100 years of UP biology"). 5. During my assignment as chief of SEAFDEC in Iloilo, the number of research and technology papers published in ISI-indexed journals increased sevenfold in 6 years. And making SEAFDEC the only world class Philippine institution in the R&D sector (Philippine science: Time for a fresh start). Para sa akin, in time of crisis -- like our crisis of science governance in universities and government -telling the truth is crucial. "Being honest does not mean being insulting, or nasty." Florlaca, ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Flor Lacanilao <florlaca@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:56 AM Subject: Roger Posadas comments on PNoy’s science policy insults scientists To: PhilScience@yahoogroups.com, philmarsci@yahoogroups.com, taxo2006@yahoogroups.com Cc: Roger Posadas <roger8posadas@yahoo.com>, "mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph" <mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph>, "eqjavier@yahoo.com" <eqjavier@yahoo.com>, "plicuanan@yahoo.com" <plicuanan@yahoo.com>, "fredpascual@yahoo.com" <fredpascual@yahoo.com>, "edpadlan@yahoo.com" <edpadlan@yahoo.com>, "raul_suarez@lifesci.ucsb.edu" <raul_suarez@lifesci.ucsb.edu>, Romeo Santos <xsrom@yahoo.com>, "caesar.saloma@gmail.com" <caesar.saloma@gmail.com>, jose magpantay <jose.magpantay@up.edu.ph>, Rafael Rodriguez <rafael.rodriguez@up.edu.ph>, Erlinda Echanis <erlinda.echanis@gmail.com>, Edison Cruz <edisondcruz912@yahoo.com>, Rolando Dayco <profrdayco@yahoo.com>

Forwarding comments of Dr. Roger Posadas, first dean (for 10 years) of UP Diliman College of Science and former chancellor of UP Diliman. Ito muna ang reaction ko (also attached):

Policy-Making Needs Science

Science 3 December 2010 Bruce Alberts No shortcut to progress Inquirer 02/19/2008 Flor Lacanilao Florlaca

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Roger Posadas <roger8posadas@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:21 AM Subject: Re: PNoy’s science policy insults scientists To: Flor Lacanilao <florlaca@gmail.com> Cc: "mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph" <mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph>, "eqjavier@yahoo.com" <eqjavier@yahoo.com>, "plicuanan@yahoo.com" <plicuanan@yahoo.com>, "fredpascual@yahoo.com" <fredpascual@yahoo.com>, "edpadlan@yahoo.com" <edpadlan@yahoo.com>, "raul_suarez@lifesci.ucsb.edu" <raul_suarez@lifesci.ucsb.edu>, Romeo Santos <xsrom@yahoo.com>, "caesar.saloma@gmail.com" <caesar.saloma@gmail.com>, jose magpantay <jose.magpantay@up.edu.ph>, Rafael Rodriguez <rafael.rodriguez@up.edu.ph>, Erlinda Echanis <erlinda.echanis@gmail.com>, Edison Cruz <edisondcruz912@yahoo.com>, Rolando Dayco <profrdayco@yahoo.com>

Hi Flor, Well, here you go again shooting off your mouth with your criticism of P-Noy's Science Policy and showing your illiteracy about S&T policies, the R&D and innovation processes, and industrial and technological catch-up. In your previous commentaries, you had been calling for "literate scientists" or what you defined to be "those who know not only research but also how it leads to development (R&D) and who do something about it". I presume that you consider yourself a "literate scientist". However, while I might concede that you know how to do research properly and how to publish research results in SCI-indexed journals, I strongly doubt whether you know anything about the "D" part of R&D - the process that that is concerned with taking an invention (the output of applied research), developing it into prototypes, testing these for marketability and manufacturability, and preparing a business plan for its commercialization. I also question your knowledge regarding the interconnections between research, innovation, competitiveness, and national development. My strong skepticism about your literacy regarding matters of S&T, S&T Policies, and National Development is based on your flawed and naive notions about S&T and development.

First, in criticizing P-Noy's science policy you betray an ignorance of the distinction between science policy and technology policy. Science policy refers to government measures on how to develop scientific research and science resources, while technology policy has to do with government decisions on the choice of technologies, the methods of acquiring technologies, technology strategies and technology roadmaps. Obviously, P-Noy's praise of Sec. Montejo's technology inititaives like the monorail is an attempt to enunciate an incipient national technology policy, which I hope will develop into a policy geared towards technological selfreliance and cluster-based industrialization. Just like what America, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Israel, China, and India had done successfully in order to catch up economically, the Philippines must pursue technological self-reliance and catch-up by creating the industrial clusters where we can start producing our own trains, buses, electric cars, power plants, ships, airplanes, helicopters, rockets, tanks, submarines, robots, medicines, etc. So why should scientists feel insulted when P-Noy expresses an incipient technology policy of selfreliance? You point out more or less correctly that our country was next to Japan some 50 years ago and that today we have been "left behind by no less than 12 Asian couuntries". But obviously, you have not studied exhaustively - as I have done - how these Asian counties were able to overtake us and even catch up with the advanced countries. For contrary to your historically false "Science Push" development formula that "scientific research is a prerequisite to technological development", these countries (South Korea, Taiwan, China, India, Malaysia, Israel).first pursued and attained technological carch-up and self-reliance in selected technologies before pursuing scientific catch-up in terms of scientific paper production Even the US and Japan followed this formula. The US first attained industrial and technological power before achieving scientific power status. It started becoming a scientific powerhouse only after World War II. Same with Japan, which first build up its industrial and technological capabilities with the help of a huge engineering manpower base before attempting to catch-up in scientific research. Technological catch-up can certainly be done without basic scientific research because all you need to do is reverse engineer an imported product and then do creative engineering redesign to improve the design of the imported product. As pointed out by the Korean technology management scholar, Linsu Kim, in 1993: "R&D in the formal sense of the term was not important for Korea during this stage of imitating mature technologies. Industries in fact reversed the sequence of R&D&E: it started with engineering (E) for products and processes imported from abroad, and then progressively evolved into the position of undertaking a substantial development (D). But research (R) was not relevant to Korea's industrialization through the 1970s." (Linsu Kim, "National System of Industrial Innovation: Dynamics of Capability Building in Korea", in Nelson, Richard (ed), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 357-383.) If you don't believe me, I can lend you the following books on South Korea's industrial and technological catch-up for your enlightenment: Alice Amsden, Asia's Next Giant; South Korea and Late Industrialization (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1989) and Linsu Kim, Imitation to Innovation: The Dynamics of Korea's Technological Learning (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997). This technological catch-up formula of reverse engineering followed by creative engineering redesign to achieve technological self-reliance has been historically validated again and again

in Taiwan, China, Malaysia, India, Brazil, Israel. and other newly industrializing country. The reason why we have been left behind is not because of our poor research productivity but because our political and business leaders have been brainwashed by mainstream economists into upholding the theory of comparative advantage which says that Filipinos should just import and use advanced equipment and technologies instead of trying to produce our own advanced equipment and technologies. Ed Padlan, therefore, is partially correct when he said that the Philippines should have more engineers running the government for it's a historical fact that most of those who engineered the successful catch-up of the newly industrializing countries were engineers who practiced catch-up technology management and threw away the theory of comparative advantage taught in schools of economics. I said I partiallu agree because what those successful countries really had plenty of and what we badly need right now are technology managers whether they come from engineering, science, business, and other backgrounds. Technology managers are persons who are knowledgeable and competent in identifying, forecasting, selecting, acquiring, creating, developing, transferring, commercializing, and deploying technologies for the defensible and sustainable competitive advantage of a firm or a nation. So if you want to be a "literate scientist", as you defined it, you should study technology management and stop pretending you know anything about Science, Technology, and Innovation Policies and National Development for you only end up displaying your scientific chauvinism, hubris, and simple-minded naivete on these matters. And please stop quoting American basic scientists who know next to nothing about S&T and national development in developing countries. Roger
From: Flor Lacanilao <florlaca@gmail.com> To: PhilScience@yahoogroups.com; philmarsci@yahoogroups.com; taxo2006@yahoogroups.com Cc: mgmontejo@dost.gov.ph; eqjavier@yahoo.com; plicuanan@yahoo.com; fredpascual@yahoo.com; depedcommunications@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:53 PM Subject: PNoy’s science policy insults scientists

PNoy’s science policy insults scientists Bruce Alberts, Editor-in-Chief of Science and for 12 years was president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, says “Over the long run, any nation that makes crucial decisions while ignoring science is doomed.” It is critical that national legislation be based on what science knows about potential harm, he added (“Policy-Making Needs Science”). It is therefore alarming that President Aquino’s science report in his SONA ignores the overwhelming consensus that scientific research is a prerequisite to technological development. With such practices, it will be difficult to make wise decisions, Alberts added. In his SONA, President Aquino said, "Creativity is in display with the innovations that are already being implemented. We have developed low-cost traps that kill mosquito larvae, probably contributing to the nearly fourteen percent decrease in

dengue incidents; coconut coir fibers that are normally just disposed of have been used as a cost-effective way to strengthen our roads; we have landslide sensors that warn when soil erosion has reached dangerous levels; we have developed early flood warning systems for riverside communities. All of these are products of Filipino creativity.” But we are already in the 21st century. Innovations like these are no longer done. The President continued, “DOST and UP have even teamed up to develop a prototype monorail system, which could potentially provide a home grown mass transport solution that would cost us as little as 100 million pesos per kilometer, much cheaper than the current cost of similar mass transit systems. . . I am telling you now: We can dream about them, we are capable of achieving them, and we will achieve them.” Can the DOST and UP personnel involved in this project show -- with properlypublished studies -- the cost-effective, safety, capability claim, etc.? On the other hand, it can be shown that in its over 50 years of existence, the DOST has been funding and announcing inventions and innovations, which “are products of Filipino creativity.” These were not backed up with properly done research by published scientist. And during this period, the Philippines, from second only to Japan in Asia, has been left behind by no less than 12 Asian countries. Further, our stunted growth of scientific capability has been shown by our S&T performance (this is measured by the number of scientific publications in peerreviewed international journals). In 2005, our total scientific publications (in highimpact journals) were only 178, compared to those of Singapore’s 3,600-plus, Taiwan’s 10,800 and South Korea’s 16,400. China in 2009 produced 125,000. “The environment in which decisions are made in a democracy will always be highly politicized, but it is crucial that both sides of any argument pay close attention both to what science knows and how that knowledge has been gained” Alberts concludes. Florlaca -----------------------------

3 Attached files|89KB 1. Policy-making needs science (Science 2010).doc

2. 0 PDI__No shortcut to progress.doc 3. Comments of K Primavera, B Vallejo, and J Oclarit.docx 4.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.