I am posting the article below in reply to the comments of Forum member Tonybau to my response to Dr. Isagani R. Cruz’s column about the state of academic research in the Philippines. It was originally published in two parts in the May 19 and 26, 2005 issues of the Philippine Star.
Public understanding of science By Flor Lacanilao, PhD “Development goals that do not recognize the importance of science and technology in economic transformation are likely to fail, especially those aimed at reducing poverty and raising income levels” (Harvard Report: Meeting the needs of developing countries, 2001). Science in the Philippines, however, has hardly progressed to enable us to produce or adapt useful technologies for sustained development, and research is the culprit.
1. Research & development process One way to improve the situation is to know first the R&D process. This consists of information production (research), information dissemination (extension work), and the use of information (development). Development depends on the quality of disseminated information, which relies on the way research is done. To do research properly, study results must be published in a research journal adequately peer-reviewed and accessible for international verification.
In science, the normal way of publishing results is the international refereed journal. Such published study is known as a scientific paper or valid publication. This is the scientist’s primary output, and is the source of information for the growth of scientific knowledge or science. The paper has to pass through adequate peer review before publication. It has to be accessible through indexes and normal library channels to enable international experts to do follow-up studies and verify the results. The scientific method requires this. But we have limited experts in various fields to do adequate peer review and verification studies. Still, most of our research papers are published locally. Therefore, they have doubtful validity and hardly contribute to the growth of science. These are the basic problems of research in the Philippines, the reasons we cannot sustain development.
The next phase of R&D is information dissemination. This usually starts with review articles, which are authored by respected scientists. Scientists are researchers who have published their studies in international journals. Those who have published enough papers on a given subject in such journals write review articles by gathering reliable information from important journals. From review articles, information is disseminated to the general public and the other users through various means – newspapers and magazines, newsletters, textbooks and manuals, radio and television, and the Internet.
Whatever is the means, the success of extension work depends on the information quality. This is the reason why doing research properly – including publication in adequately peer-reviewed and accessible journals – is important.
Writing review articles, and to some extent extension materials, is the scientist’s second role in R&D. They are addressed to the general public and the other users of information. This function differs from the scientist’s primary role of producing scientific papers, which are addressed mainly to other scientists for verification. Many fail to distinguish these two roles of scientists. They say, for instance, that research papers should be published locally to make them available to users. Since we do not have enough scientists in a given field to adequately review manuscripts, most locally published data are of poor quality, and using them for development programs is the common cause of R&D problems in the country.
Another use of information is for generating technologies. Some review articles are on technology production using scientific papers. As noted earlier, these contain the useful information that forms the raw material for the growth of science. Hence, science is the source of information for generating technologies. To be useful, technologies should also be made by scientists, who should not be mistaken with those who have published only in newsletters, institutional publications, and conference proceedings. Papers in these publications are not taken seriously, and they don’t count when assessing the science and technology (S&T) performance of nations.
If desired development continues to elude the Philippines, blame the technologies we claim to have. They used largely poor quality information from publications other than international journals. This information did not contribute to the growth of science. And no amount of extension effort will fully satisfy users of technologies made from information of doubtful validity.
The relation between R&D and S&T can then be illustrated as follows: RESEARCH to SCIENCE to TECHNOLOGY to DEVELOPMENT.
Development depends on technology, which depends on science, and ultimately on research. Thus, the basic component is research. If the country has development problems, one can predict a major cause if he or she knows the role of each component in the series. It can also be seen that development will hardly follow even if the funding or number of Ph.Ds is increased without the correct research output. This is evident in the Philippines.
Funding is a necessary but not sufficient precondition for research and development. It will only improve research if every funded study ends up with a scientific paper. The prescribed increase in R&D budget for developing nations assumes that, like in developed countries, research is done properly. This is what leads to national progress, which can support more research for more progress, and so on.
2. R&D problems in the Philippines As noted above, problems holding back the growth of science in the Philippines are rooted in wrong research practices, not funding as is commonly thought of. Poor graduate training is a major cause. Or is it an effect?
An important requirement for an advanced degree in science is the thesis, which is meant to be training in research. And research is not completed until results are published. But in the country’s graduate schools, except some in UP, the end of graduate training is the bound thesis, rather than its publication. Hence, most holders of graduate degrees in the country don’t think of proper publication as part of research.
Many in the graduate faculty who avoid international publication failed to develop the needed research capability. Hence, they are unable to exploit scientific advances and to equip the country’s future researchers and technologists with useful skills. Unpublished faculty members produce unpublished Ph.Ds, who, in turn, become graduate faculty members and repeat the process.
Many of our Ph.Ds in science who got their degrees abroad did not publish their theses, knowing their home institutions would recognize the degrees even without publications. Whereas new Ph.Ds without publication experience in international journals don’t get faculty positions or research grants in developed countries, in the Philippines they are given automatic promotions. They include those in the graduate faculty, industry, and science administration.
Promotions, even to full professor, are given without justifiable indication of contributions to knowledge or consideration of valid publications. The common practice is to give more importance to promise (graduate degree) than performance (useful publications).
A research paper published without adequate peer review and not accessible through indexes and normal library channels, is gray literature. Examples are research papers in newsletters, institutional publications, and most conference proceedings. Production of papers continues for such publications because they entitle the authors to promotions, honoraria, or even awards. But as has been shown elsewhere, such publications hardly contribute to the growth of science and technology and do not count in ranking nations based on S&T performance. Most of our science administrators and researchers forget that publication in international journals can improve our capability to advance local science and technology.
We publish research journals without enough qualified researchers to manage them and adequately review manuscripts. We should review the intentions of Philippine journals. Obviously in their present state, they are not promoting Philippine science. And science organizations should stop giving awards to papers published in them (except the few that are now ISI journals).
A worse practice is to use unpublished data for policy-making, development programs and other purposes. This is common in the local implementation of projects. The practice is prevalent because of contractual demands from the government and international funding agencies, totally ignoring the established procedures of scientific research. It is an outcome of failure to make publication as the purpose of data gathering. Even those seeking high positions include in their achievements a long list of "unpublished research."
There were large increases in the budget of the Department of Science and Technology, particularly in 1991-1996. Increases in the DOST budget during this period had a yearly mean of 36 percent or from P854 million to P3.4 billion. But research output, extension materials, and other publications consisted largely of project reports, institutional publications, and other gray literature, which did not count in S&T assessments. They made up more than 95 percent of the total number of papers produced. Only 249 papers were published in international journals in 1995, half of which was from the International Rice Research Institute in Los Baños and other international R&D organizations in the country, and about a fourth was from the University of the Philippines.
Further, among seven nations in the region, including Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, the Philippines had the least progress in S&T between 1981 and 1995. Whereas its Asian neighbors had 37 to 300 percent increases in the number of international journal publications (the standard measure of S&T performance), that of the Philippines increased by only seven percent, and this was contributed largely by international R&D organizations in the country.
Nations with more productive scientists were ahead of the Philippines in economic growth. Smaller Taiwan had 23 times and tiny Singapore, six times more accredited publications in science than the Philippines in 1994-1995.
By 2000, the Philippines was still behind the seven countries. It has, however, made significant progress. And this is expected to continue since a few leading universities have been giving cash incentives for articles published in international journals. For instance, since 1999, the University of the Philippines has been giving an award of P50,000 (later raised to P55,000) for every paper published in an international journal (defined as journal covered in the indexes of the Institute for Scientific Information, or ISI journal). By 2003, the number of such publications from UP increased twofold, to 182. Although we still have a long way to go (China’s total publications were 58 times that of the Philippines in 2000; Japan’s, 160 times), we are on the right track.
Contrary to common claims and practices in the country, we have hardly generated, fully adapted, or transferred useful technologies. We should have realized this by now. When our agricultural products are refused by importing countries for contaminants or diseases, we are unable to take remedial action for scientific inability. As a former director of graduate studies in physics at Princeton said, "You need to know how to do research properly before you can begin to think about commercializing discoveries."
In local extension work, the quality of information is often ignored. Most extension materials contain information from project reports, newsletters, institutional publications, and conference proceedings. These are evident in the appended list of references. They are prepared largely by well-meaning but unqualified people forced to do a scientist’s job. Hence, the materials are of doubtful integrity.
Most users of information, like decision-makers, teachers, or the general public, rely on the information reaching them. They may not be able to judge the quality. If most of the information they get is substandard, as what often happens in the Philippines and other poor countries, errors are propagated and people hardly learn something useful. As a former chairperson of the US Atomic Energy Commission observed, "The public will remain uninformed and uneducated in science until the media professionals decide otherwise, until they stop quoting charlatans and quacks, and until respected scientists speak up."
3. Needed changesThe above problems are perpetuated by the indifference to reform so entrenched at all levels of research administration in the country. The vicious cause-and-effect cycle must be broken. It has wasted much time and resources. R&D funds have been spent to produce unpublished papers (graduate theses, project reports, lectures, etc.) and gray literature with the thought that the job has been done. While the practice has benefited the authors (promotions, honoraria, awards), it has hardly contributed to institutional growth and national progress in science and technology.
There is too much talk about technology and development, when attention should focus on changing our research practices. Evaluation should be in accordance with the established tradition of scientific publication and accepted measures of performance. International indicators of science and technology development, not publicity and claims of achievements, should be the standard measure of S&T performance in the country.
To continue the steps taken by some universities in improving research, nationwide changes are needed in graduate training, research practices, and performance evaluation. A simple way to speed up the development of science is to publish study results in ISI journals (see ISI website:
www.isinet.com). Publications in such journals should be required in (a) the granting of the Ph.D. degree, (b) appointing members of the graduate faculty and journal editorial boards, (c) giving research grants, promotions, and awards, and (d) appointing research managers and science administrators. We must build up the competence at all levels of our research endeavor. This will enable us to develop the needed competitive ability.
Researchers should publish their studies, even if the funding agency wants only a final report. This applies also to the graduate thesis, even if the program requires only a bound thesis. To serve as training for writing and publishing research papers, the graduate thesis should be written as a publishable manuscript, ready for submission to an ISI journal. A master’s degree may require only a publishable manuscript, but a Ph.D. degree should require at least one publication from the Ph.D. thesis. The researcher’s contribution to the development of science and education will come from such publications.
Three guides in writing a manuscript are: (a) a good book on scientific writing and publishing, (b) a guide for authors of an ISI journal, and (c) sample articles from the journal. Robert Day’s How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, 5th edition (1998), is an excellent book. The three writing guides improve chances of a manuscript in getting accepted in a good journal. Select journals that do not have page charges (there are enough of them in your field) if you don’t have funds for publication.
Changing the criteria for appointments, promotions, and awards will not be easy. The usual problems with incumbents, politics, and mediocrity have defied past attempts. For instance, graduate faculty often voted against changes because members are already enjoying benefits with only progress reports, and most of them don’t have publications in international journals. Eventually, however, only respected scientists will dominate positions in all ranks of our research enterprise. This is the situation that had facilitated advancement of science and technology in nations that achieved sustained economic growth and improved human condition.
Note that most of the proposed changes will not need added cost. And if a part of the DOST budget is used as cash incentives for research publications like what the UP is doing, we will see the dawn of scientific revolution in the country. Meanwhile, the National Academy of Science and Technology must be more active in policy debates related to science-based initiatives. It should play a major role in our economic reform and social transformation. Among its members are literate scientists who can promote science literacy, especially among government and industry leaders, and ensure that scientific research is incorporated into all of the country’s development strategies. There is no better alternative for industrialization than advanced science and technology.
------------
Flor Lacanilao, Ph.D., is a retired professor of Marine Science at the University of the Philippines in Diliman, Quezon city, and a former director of SEAFDEC (Southeast Asia Fisheries Development Center).
