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 changes
The 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.