|
CAN
AFRICA DEVELOP WITHOUT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY?
Osita
Ogbu 1
The
30th of June is Africa’s science and technology day—the
day when Africa and its people rededicate their efforts to scientific
and technological development. This day was chosen at the 46th Ministerial
Conference of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) on June 30,
1987. It was passed that this day was to be commemorated every year
on 30th June. This is yet another day in the calendar of African
policy makers, scientists, researchers and industrialists. In fact,
it is a day that all of Africa should mark, not for what we have
achieved in the field of science and technology but for what we
have not achieved: the missed cues; the missed inventions; the lack
of supporting environments for science and technology to thrive
and our general lack of interest in science and technology. We are
truly in the age of science with many breakthroughs and this day
is likely to pass without any one making a note of it. Africans
have surrendered to the rest of the world in science and technology.
Globalization is driven by science and technology. For example,
the Internet is facilitating rapid opening up and integration of
national economies. It is the engine of economic liberalization
and associated developments in international trade.
As
consumers of science and technology we are fascinated by gadgets,
the latest equipments, the speed of these equipments, tools as “toys”
for accomplishing our daily chores. As fascinated as we may be about
the tools and gadgets, we never stop to marvel and to understand
the science behind the tools. Why are we so keen on the latest gadgets
but not keen in improving our science and engineering schools? Why
do we appreciate someone else’s innovation and do very little
to support our own innovators? Only 0.1% of patents registered in
the United States Patent and Trademarks Office originate from sub-Saharan
Africa.
We
have never paused to ask why we score very high on the barometer
of consumerism and low on the barometer of production. Even as we
enjoy the benefits, we never pause to understand the threats these
technologies pose to our way of life, our culture and our relationships.
Every new technology creates its own vacuum; its own set of issues.
Are we simply going to be “standbyers” and consume what
the enthusiastic technology-merchants dish to us? Or are we going
to invest in research, build capacities that would enable us to
“own” the technology, maximize the benefits while minimizing
the problems and direct these technology to Africa’s real
problems? Examples from the Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs)
and from other emerging nations such as Brazil, China and India,
where sustained economic growth have been achieved, indicate a strong
determination to build indigenous science and technology capacities.
It is evident from their R&D expenditures and the number of
researchers per million inhabitants. The NICs spend US$66 per inhabitant
while China spends $17, India $11 and Africa $6. Sub-Saharan Africa
has 113 researchers per million population compared to China’s
454, India’s 151 and NICs’ 595. We should have these
figures in mind as we chart visions and dreams of industrialization
by 2010, 2020 etc.
There
is a certain unwitting acceptance of technological determinism among
Africans, certainly among many African policy makers. Their tendency
is to treat technology as manna from heaven. That technology does
not have a social context. And, that the impacts or effects of technology
are determined by the technology itself. Yet we know that the direction
of development and impacts of any given technology are shaped by
social and economic forces embedded in well-crafted science and
technology policies.
Where
did Africa go wrong?
Science
and technology are permanent lexicon in the African development
discourse among our policy makers. No speech will be read and no
plan would be promulgated without mention of the importance of science
and technology in Africa’s development. From the Lagos Plan
of Action of 1980, the Kilimanjaro Declaration of 1987, the Khartoum
Declaration of 1988, the Addis Ababa Declaration of 1998 and many
others, it is clear that African political leaders, at least on
paper, understand the importance of science and technology in the
socio-economic development of the continent. The Lagos Plan of Action
mandates that by 1990, every African country should be spending
at least 1% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on science and technology.
No African country has met this target twelve years after the due
date. The Addis Ababa Declaration captures and reaffirms the essence
of all the other declarations thus: “aware of the considerable
impact of the progress made in the field of science and technology
and aware of the challenges facing our continent, we are determined
to promote the development of science and technology and to share
our experiences in this areas so as to meet these challenges”.
In our determination, what progressive steps have we taken to realize
this loft declaration. A few institutions have been set up but none
of these institutions will exist without donor financing in spite
of their status as inter-governmental institutions. No meeting of
researchers, and for that matter, no meeting of those charged with
science and technology policy making can take place in Africa without
donor financing. How determined are we then to exploit science and
technology for Africa’s development? Every meeting, every
workshop and every conference charts “the way forward”
and yet we are getting farther and farther away from the “promised
land”.
But
where is the action? African governments have all created national
science councils with lofty objectives but given them very little
resources with which to champion their mandates. African Science
and technology ministries are the least funded of all ministries
and their mandates less clear. The notion of an institution to coordinate
science and technology research and institutions is not taken seriously.
It is often a symbol of what could be, a statement of intent. No
wonder the media leads in charging that the ministry of science
and technology is a junior ministry whose Minister has a lower standing
than his counterpart in say, the planning ministry. But how can
this be? The ministry that is charged with the responsibility of
generating new knowledge and in charting the science and technology
development of a country be junior? Perceptions become reality and
these impressions have persisted. The media must help us in reversing
this impression. It must assume its role in accurately informing
the public of the role of science and technology in improving societal
welfare. It must help in building a strong popular constituency
for science and technology; in demystifying science and technology
and in putting pressure on governments to respect their commitments
to promote science and technology for development. The media must
not be associated with the simplistic, erroneous and dangerous notion
that science and technology institutions are junior to their counterparts.
On the contrary, they must be promoted as critical for change and
development.
We
have research institutes and laboratories that have not only become
skeletons of their past but some are now mere consulting outfits.
If there is no donor money, even salaries of the researchers will
not be paid. Yes, the structural adjustment program did not help
matters. But science and technology research and application have
never seriously been a top priority item for African national governments.
If it were, no one would convince them to do away with that which
is of strategic national importance. Foreign governments and foreign
companies make welcome noises about technology transfer? But who
would ever freely give away his competitive advantage? What policies
have we put in place to make sure that Foreign Direct Investment
(FDI) make technological linkages to our local firms that would
eventually propel autonomous technical change? Why are we always
asking for money instead of knowledge from donors? With knowledge you
create your own wealth, with aid you become dependent on foreigners.
What
of the brain drain?
Africa’s
brain drain phenomenon has both pull and push factors that have
contributed significantly to the poor state of science and technology
in the region. Given poor political and economic conditions of most
African states, many top scientists voted with their feet. Those
who were trained abroad, sometimes at great expense to Africa, refused
to return. Some developed countries also put in place policies to
attract highly specialized Africans thereby depleting the meager
stock. It is no longer useful to spend enormous amounts of energy
lamenting this drain but to look for ways in which to benefit from
the stock of knowledge which these Africans now possess. Permanent
reverse brain drain is not likely to happen any time soon. Africa
in partnership with those countries and institutions that benefit
from Africa’s scientists must put in place policies and mechanisms
for exploiting, albeit in temporary periods, the skills and capabilities
of these Africans in supporting indigenous Africa’s science
and technology capacities. The suggested details of this mechanism
will be the subject of another article. But suffice it to say that
this mechanism will involve a combination of change in attitude
among our policy makers. They must provide a suitable domestic environment
that not only encourages Africans abroad to freely give of themselves
and share their knowledge during these short stays and exchanges;
summer programs and sabbaticals but to establish strong national
linkages that may eventually force them to return finally. This
program can be financed through a strong partnership between Africa
and the developed world.
Does the New Partnership for Africa’s Development
(NEPAD) Present Any Opportunity?
Africa
has another opportunity through the NEPAD process to acquire, indigenize
and sustain its science and technological capabilities. In fact,
the entire NEPAD initiative should be knowledge-driven. The emphasis
should be on science-led sustainable development that is rooted
in African scholarship and global knowledge. The NEPAD initiative
must champion and popularize science and technology as the real
forces for socio-economic growth. The billions of dollars that the
developed partners are likely to give in support of this initiative
should not only be conditional on good governance, as important
as this is, but on a clear program of science and technology-led
development. It must be used to rebuild our science and engineering
schools and infrastructure and to support knowledge networks and
institutions in Africa that generate and broker science and technology
knowledge. African problems: food insecurity; diseases; ignorance;
supply constraints, lend themselves to science and technological
solutions. Why not an innovation fund that encourages the work of
scientists and engineers to be translated into goods and services.
Why not an African Science and Technology University where African
scholars both at home and abroad with their counterparts elsewhere
who have expertise on African problems can collaborate and forge
strong links with the private sector in search of science-based
solutions to Africa’s real problems. Africa is endowed with
abundant natural resources but it needs science and technology to
unleash the potential: to sustainably utilize these resources to
generate wealth and fight poverty. African policy makers should
create the environment for innovation to thrive. Now is the time
to go beyond rhetoric and declarations.
|
