Scientific policies of developing countries and mid-level entry strategy: from the perspective of a marine scientist

Abstract

Abstract Scientific developments are considered the primary source of the economic prosperity of a country. This faith in science appears stronger among economists and policymakers than those involved in day-to-day activities. However, science policy is often confused with a policy for science. The former is dictated by national interest and ideology, including long-term plans for the country. Because it is so crucial, whether to let scientists formulate the science policy of a nation is a long-standing issue in many countries. Policymakers and politicians generally provide the overall picture with some help from scientists. A common approach adopted by developing countries is the so-called mid-level entry strategy. The idea is to dispense basic science to developed countries and focus on those areas that may bring immense profits. And when the time comes, and technology matures, bet heavily on those specific areas and jump ahead of the flock to reap the benefit. However, many consider DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) the most successful research and development (R&D) institution in the US. It is said that the accomplishment of the agency was possible because they started with basic science and moved up to applied and practical research. Doing so dominated the entire value chain, and the know-how was then disseminated to the public. Such observation leads one to conclude that, contrary to the myth of mid-level entry strategy, the real big reward for R&D of a country comes from starting at the fundamental level. On the other hand, because scientific and technological development is not straightforward, some examples may point to the contrary.