Collaboration, exchange and stability key to effective policies on science and tech research


More advanced Asian nations including Korea need to adopt new science and technology policies to achieve globally relevant innovations, says professor Stefan Kuhlmann of the Netherlands’ University of Twente.

Kuhlmann, who has focused on innovation systems and policies for science and technology for the past 18 years, said that Korea and other developed Asian nations including Japan are now capable of competing on the global stage in terms of scientific innovation, but that their policies need to be altered to reflect these developments.

“These countries need to give up previous strategies of following, of copying developments seen in Western countries,” Kuhlmann said.

“They are in a situation, probably not to lead the world economy but to be parallel movers. That means they are strong enough to develop (their) own driving innovative concepts in parallel to activities you see in Western countries.”

Kuhlmann said, however, that following the development models already in place in more advanced nations is not necessarily the right answer.

Saying that while systems in place in North American and many European nations are more mature than those seen in Asia, each system has its advantages and disadvantages.

“The advantages (of Western systems) are that they are stable, robust and cannot easily be destroyed, but also there is also some degree of conservatism in the system, and certainly for Europe, lack of creativity, innovativeness and entrepreneurial spirit,” he said, adding that several Asian systems show openness and speed lacking in the West.

Kuhlmann also pointed out that as a nation’s economy develops, the government’s role in science and technology needs to adapt.

“(The role of) government depends on the state of economic development. In very underdeveloped economies, the government is often the only institution that has the authority,” he said.

“In advanced nations, it is the other way around. You see strong companies doing lots of R&D and you see strong societal organizations involved in idea generation. Somewhere in between are some Asian nations. There are different degrees of government power needed.”

Concerning the Korean government’s control-focused approach to state-funded research, Kuhlmann advises increased freedom.

The Korean government’s investment in research and development has increased at the second-highest rate in the world over the past 10 years after China, and the country ranks fifth in terms of its ratio of investment to gross domestic product.

However, the government has taken a results-oriented approach to managing research and development programs. As such, an annual review system is the norm for most state-funded research programs, with the exception of the recently launched Institute of Basic Science.

“Creative research organizations need some freedom. If they are controlled too tightly, you will kill the creativity. That is in nobody’s interest,” Kuhlmann said.

“Direct government control (over state-funded research institutions) is not advisable, but they should not be given 100 percent freedom. They should be semi-autonomous organizations.”

Having analyzed related policies implemented in a large number of countries, Kuhlmann says that there isn’t an ideal development model that can be applied to all nations, but that a platform for collaboration and exchange between those in charge of related policies is vital for creating an effective system.

He says that the absence of such a platform, which is the case in many countries, leads to counter-productive rivalry between government organizations that are in charge of various science and technology-related fields.

“One option, which is successfully running in a couple of countries, is the establishment of a science and technology innovation board or council close to a powerful center in the government,” Kuhlmann said, noting that such organizations in Finland and Germany have been in operation for some time with positive results. He said that the body serving the function would also be responsible for interacting with the government and allocating the state funds, thus lessening the government’s control over research organizations.

“If a board of influential people representing science, technology, industry, societal organizations and politics has sufficient power, it can make ministries responsive and to collaborate.”

He added that such a body could help address the problem of lack of cooperation between universities, industry and research institutions seen in Korea, and provide long-term stability and shield research organizations from developments brought by administration changes such as those being discussed by Korea’s presidential hopefuls.

One such change is the revival of government ministry dedicated to science and technology, which was merged with the education ministry under the Lee Myung-bak government.

Democratic United Party frontrunner Moon Jae-in has said that he will bring back the science ministry and upgrade the post of its minister to the level of vice prime minister, while former party chairman Chung Se-kyun has made similar statements.

While Saenuri Party presidential candidate Park Geun-hye has not yet made her position clear, observers expect that she will be open to similar suggestions.

By Choi He-suk (cheesuk@heraldcorp.com)