Towards formulating effective research and development national ...

Download PDF
2 downloads 1359 Views 133KB Size Report
Comment
Oct 27, 2012 - Research and development (R&D) has become a vital source of boosting growth and ..... In response, new arrangements were established to hire universities' leaders. .... through dedicated policy initiatives (UNCTAD 2014).
Development in Practice, 2014 Vol. 24, No. 8, 1003–1015, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2014.966654

Towards formulating effective research and development national strategies in Arab countries Ahmed ElObeidy* (Received October 27, 2012; accepted February 20, 2014) Extremely weak R&D has a negative impact on growth and development in Arab countries. Developing a better R&D strategy could enhance capacity and effectiveness of R&D. The failure of the previously developed strategies in Arab countries was due to lack of vision, incorrect identification of R&D priorities, and disregard consulting stakeholders. This article discusses the challenges of developing R&D national strategies in Arab countries including identifying R&D priorities, managing stakeholders, assessing the current situation of R&D, and defining objectives of the strategies. Des stratégies de R&D extrêmement faibles ont un impact négatif sur la croissance et le développement dans les pays arabes. L’élaboration d’une meilleure stratégie de R&D pourrait améliorer les capacités et l’efficacité du secteur R&D. L’échec des stratégies précédemment élaborées dans les pays arabes peut être attribué au manque de vision, à une identification incorrecte des priorités de la R&D et à la non-consultation des parties prenantes. Les défis à relever pour élaborer des stratégies nationales de R&D dans les pays arabes, y compris l’identification des priorités en R&D, la gestion des parties prenantes, l’évaluation de la situation actuelle en matière de R&D et la définition des objectifs des stratégies sont traités ici. En los países árabes, la extrema debilidad del sector de investigación y desarrollo (IyD) ha generado un impacto negativo en el crecimiento y en el desarrollo. La creación de una mejor estrategia a ser implementada en este sector fortalecería su capacidad y su eficacia. El fracaso de las estrategias establecidas anteriormente en estos países se atribuye a la falta de visión, a la incorrecta identificación de prioridades en torno a la IyD, y a la no realización de una consulta que posibilitara incorporar el sentir de los actores. El artículo aborda los retos a ser enfrentados a la hora de elaborar estrategias de IyD en estos países, entre los cuales se encuentra la identificación de prioridades al respecto, la gestión orientada hacia los actores, la valoración de la situación actual de la IyD, así como la definición de los objetivos buscados al implementar cierta estrategia. Keywords: Governance and public policy; Labour and livelihoods – Economics; Technology; Arab States

Introduction Research and development (R&D) has become a vital source of boosting growth and wealth. Capacity for R&D has become the central element to national competitiveness, advanced manufacturing, high-quality jobs, and exports. Technology-based improvements to productivity consistently generate job growth over time across the economy. In the United States, for example,

*Email: [email protected] © 2014 Taylor & Francis

1004

A. ElObeidy

85% of the new jobs created in the past decade required complex knowledge skills, like analysing information, problem solving, rendering judgement, and thinking creatively. Intellectual property, brand value, process know-how, and other manifestations of brain power generated more than 70% of all US market value created over the past three decades (Bisson, Stephenson, and Viguerie 2010). Knowledge-based economic development has become closely intertwined with national competitiveness and economic policies that support innovation, technology development, entrepreneurship, workforce skills development, adoption of high performance organisational structures, and infrastructure development (Saudi Ministry of Economy and Planning 2010). However, in Arab countries, a gap exists between R&D activities and the deployment of technological innovations in production of goods (ElObeidy 2010). The extremely weak R&D has a negative impact on Arab innovation performance in both quantitative and qualitative terms. Despite repeated official Arab calls to bridge the gap between scientific research and development projects, these recommendations have translated only weakly into reality (MBRF and UNDP 2009). R&D needs to be carefully planned and managed to succeed. Developing R&D strategy can enhance the capacity and effectiveness of R&D in socio-economic development. A national R&D strategy can drive the knowledge-based economy and is necessary to enhance structural adjustments towards knowledge-based and value-added activities for economic modernisation. At the national level, R&D strategy can provide universities and research institutes with the necessary framework within which they can develop their strategies for participation in national R&D activities (UNESCO 2009). Low levels of regional R&D led to a renewed awareness in the 1990s of the importance of science and technology for development; this precipitated R&D policies to foster innovation systems and educational reform (Djeflat 2009). During the last two decades several Arab countries have developed their own national strategies on scientific research within the concepts of research, technological development, and innovation. However, many Arab countries still possess no national policies or strategies for science and technology. Where science and technology policies do exist, they are either too ambitious or ambiguous (Badran and Zou’bi 2010; Segarra 2011). They lack an implementation plan and none of them translated on the ground into change in R&D. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) Science Report 2010 confirmed that most Arab states lack a national science and technology strategy and when a policy is in place, it lacks innovation. They lack a well-designed scientific and technological policy (UNESCO 2010). Governments do not set clear and accurate policies for scientific research, nor do they define strategic targets (MBRF and UNDP 2009). In Egypt, for example, in 2000 the People’s Assembly adopted the National Strategy for Technological Development. The objectives of the strategy were increasing economic growth, promoting exports, increasing local and foreign competitiveness, utilising advanced technologies, and confronting high unemployment. Despite the introduction of this new policy, international technology transfer has remained a largely marginalised tool. This has been echoed in the negligible value of high-technology exports. As a result, Egypt’s Knowledge Economy Index (KEI) dropped in rank between 2000 and 2009 (Egyptian Ministry of Planning and International Co-operation 2011). Creating applicable and effective national strategies that support R&D in Arab countries is one of the most important steps that Arab countries need to take in order to respond practically and competently to the challenges of economic growth and development. This article discusses challenges of developing effective R&D national strategies in Arab countries.

Development in Practice

1005

Identify R&D priorities Identifying national R&D priorities is needed for addressing critical needs and developing the objectives of the strategy. A national R&D strategy needs to be tailored to each country’s specific conditions. It is therefore important to clarify how R&D is expected to contribute to overall national development objectives and where policies should intervene to achieve those objectives. Arab governments can support developing R&D strategy by providing overarching strategic goals. They have to focus on finding their own competitive edge. World Economic Forum and OECD (2011) mentioned that too often governments attempt to spur local activities by unsuccessfully trying to imitate Silicon Valley or a biotechnology hub. Rather than attempting to replicate Silicon Valley, Arab countries need to identify the advantages and unique resources that they possess and design ways to leverage those specific advantages. During the last decade many Arab countries have reduced the knowledge-based economy in establishing these so called silicon valleys. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Tunisia, Oman, Morocco, Qatar, and Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the UAE planned or established these projects. These countries are pursing knowledge-based economic development based on flawed practices, borrowed from countries perceived to have made successful transitions to knowledge-based economies (Schwalje 2012). In fact, the success of the original Silicon Valley in California was achieved without government involvement. Government attempts to create a replica of Silicon Valley in their home market will inevitably be futile (Bivens 2013). The history of Silicon Valley can be traced back 60 years. It was started as an attempt by Stanford University to lease part of the university grounds to high-tech companies, which changed later to an industrial system that promotes innovation and entrepreneurship. Silicon Valley in Southern California has become a model for high technology development. Governments in many parts of the world (including Southeast Asia and Australia) have tried to emulate this growth through various industry and regional development mechanisms – in particular, the science or technology park. However, the modelling process used by governments to promote Silicon Valley-like regional development has tended to model the wrong things about Silicon Valley. The models have tended to be mechanical and have failed to reflect the nature of information and information industries (Cook and Joseph 2001). In Saudi Arabia, the first five research priorities included nanotechnology and biotechnology (King Absulaziz University 2013). These priorities are translated in reality into meaningless research. Nanotechnology was considered a single modern technology which could revolutionise the country. In 2010, King Saud University in Saudi Arabia announced the establishment of the Institute for Nanotechnology that runs under the King Saud University in Riyadh Technology Valley. The single institute is supposed to cover varieties of research interest from seawater desalination and renewable energy to treatment of diseases such as cancer and diabetes. On the other hand, biotechnology, which was a major research interest in most Arab countries over the last three decades, failed to yield any of the envisioned impact on growth and development in the region (ElObeidy 2013). Keeping resources in mind, governments can identify unfilled needs and other opportunities to boost activities in each particular sector (World Economic Forum and OECD 2011). Each Arab country has to establish a set of R&D priorities to focus their R&D efforts in areas that are most likely to deliver economic benefit. Priorities could be identified through negotiation with stakeholders for reaching a consensus.

Manage stakeholders Consulting with key stakeholders is an important part of the process of strategy development. Partnership among diverse stakeholders is a keystone of the strategy. Failure to correctly identify

1006

A. ElObeidy

stakeholders and understand their concerns and aspirations may result in failure of the developed strategy. Arab governments play a stronger role in defining industrial economic development policy than in other regions (Schwalje 2011). Generally, strategies are developed in Arab countries by the government authorities, without the participation of stakeholders. Developing strategies without consulting stakeholders is considered one of the main causes for failure of the previously developed strategies in Arab countries. In many cases, economic development planning is based on the visions of the region’s autocratic leaders, (Schwalje 2012). Stakeholders for developing R&D strategies may include industry or business associations, representatives from the government (such as policymakers and implementers), public and private schools, universities and research institutes, and community groups. It may also be important to engage representatives from external development and donor agencies. Managing stakeholders starts with stakeholder analysis, then mapping their relationship to the strategy, and ends with defining ways of communication with stakeholders. Stakeholder analysis is important for mapping out and understanding key stakeholders. The key to stakeholder analysis is to identify and understand the different stakeholders. Often the process of identifying stakeholders results in a long list of individuals and groups. This map may be organised with branches to represent groups and topics within each branch to track each stakeholder. Each stakeholder group may be managed as a separate entity according to its unique values and interests. There are three options for stakeholder consultation for formulating R&D strategies in Arab countries: surveys, face-to-face communication, and multi-stakeholder consultations. Surveys are a cost-efficient way to gain input from a large number of people. A survey is a low-cost starting point that can followed up with mechanisms for dialogue (Alreck and Settle 1995). Generally, response to surveys is low in Arab countries. It seems, after long dictatorship regimes, Arab people were bored by formal authorities’ bureaucracies that yielded nothing. However, there are dramatic differences among regions within the same county in response to surveys. Strategy developers need to be cautious about disregarding stakeholders who ignore the surveys or ignore the first invitation for participation. Face-to-face communication is more effective than surveys in Arab countries. Meetings with individuals or groups with specific interests could be conducted through visits of strategy developers to stakeholders. Visits and meeting with stakeholders are an important way to build personal relationships while gathering data. Multi-stakeholder consultations that bring together various stakeholders in a neutral forum are necessary for sharing ideas and building consensus. Managing stakeholders of different backgrounds and interest should be planned carefully to avoid conflicts and facilitate reaching a consensus. Assess R&D Assessment of R&D includes identifying weaknesses, strengths, opportunities, and risks. There are general features of R&D system in Arab countries that include status and performance of research systems and status of entrepreneurship. Generally, capacity and competence to manage R&D in the Arab region are limited and often fall below international standards. Research system The Arab states have a low ranking in research development and technological innovation (Sasson 2007). Research that is done by universities and research institutes in the region may not be representative of mainstream concerns or may not relate to the areas of emphasis of

Development in Practice

1007

international and national research activities (ESCWA 1998). Research undertaken by the higher education sector often serves purely academic purposes (Badran and Zou’bi 2010). Higher education institutions have not succeeded in determining societal needs and setting research priorities, and this in turn has lowered their actual impact on higher and technical educational curricula (MBRF and UNDP 2009). In the region there are more than 400 universities. Most of them offer doctorate degrees. In much of the region, the quality of higher education has not kept pace with international standards (Wilkens 2011). Universities in the Arab countries often serve only as degree- or certificate-awarding institutions, providing the necessary documentation for thousands of young people to apply for jobs. Marginalised in the development process, these universities seek only to churn out graduates. However, the poor quality of the higher education system is a major constraint for innovation systems in the Arab region (UNDP 2003). Higher education in the Arab states is succeeding only in producing bureaucrats with little innovative capacity to meet the needs of the private sector. There is a mismatch between the skills companies are seeking and what universities in the region are producing. The result is millions of young people with high expectations and no hope of fulfilling their dreams (UNDP 2003; Badran and Zou’bi 2010). In addition, training in general is driven by supply rather than demand. Training programmes focus on quantity, rather than on quality. The main problem with private universities in Arab countries is that they are mostly for-profit and many have been established without adequate planning, clear policy or regulations, funds, or even qualified staff. The lack of clearly implemented policy and regulations produces low-quality private universities. As a result, the establishment of private universities in Arab countries has not, in most cases, led to improving education or research quality (Sabry 2009). In recent years, a handful of countries in the region have established national agencies for quality assurance. However, these institutions have limited regulatory capacity and have not focused their efforts on evaluation. In addition, they are largely governmental bodies and lack the independence and scope to push for more fundamental reforms. Over the last decade, there has been progress in the establishment of independent accreditation and licensing systems in the region. However, these structures are still in an embryonic stage. While national accreditation bodies exist in 10 countries, they are not autonomous from government institutions or engaged in the rigorous development and definition of standards. Therefore they are not positioned to serve as buffers to state involvement. New independent structures and associations have not yet emerged to fill the gap in this area (Wilkens 2011). Although Arab countries have many scientific research institutions and centres, which are heavily informed by the notion of technology transfer, they do not work to indigenise existing knowledge so as to allow for innovation and local knowledge production. As a result, these institutions have not succeeded in determining societal needs and setting research priorities, and this in turn has lowered their actual impact on higher and technical educational curricula. Military research in Western and Asian countries forms an important sub-field of both R&D and the marketplace. In Arab countries however, military research is limited to improving military performance and to developing advanced applications of information technology and genetic research with the aim of upholding security, combating crime and terrorism, and maintaining the regime (MBRF and UNDP 2009). National and regional studies, carried out by Arab experts or foreign specialists, have concluded that scientific research, development, and technological innovation in the Arab States need a major shake-up to move closer to the world average indices (Sasson 2007). Despite the great variation in economies across the Arab countries, none of the Arab countries established sufficient and efficient institutions to build the systems of innovation. All the Arab countries – including resource-rich, oil-based, high-income Gulf states – still lack efficient

1008

A. ElObeidy

institutions to build the systems of innovation due to failure to promote efficient educational system (Nour 2013). Much money has been spent in Arab Gulf universities. However, the goal has been prestige rather than development. Several Gulf universities tried to satisfy the international accreditation criteria without regard for their role in socio-economic development. King Abdulaziz University and King Saud University in Saudi Arabia, for example, tried to acquire the affiliations of overseas scientists with an eye to gaining visibility in research journals. More than 60 top-ranked researchers from different scientific disciplines, all on the Institute for Scientific Information’s (ISI) highly-cited list, have signed part-time employment arrangements with King Abdulaziz University, in which they agree to add King Abdulaziz University as a second affiliation to their names on ISI’s list of highly-cited researchers. Meanwhile, King Saud University has climbed several hundred places in international rankings largely through initiatives specifically targeted towards attaching King Saud University’s name to research publications, regardless of whether the work involved any meaningful collaboration with King Saud University researchers (Bhattacharjee 2011). Entrepreneurship The Arab world’s R&D institutions have weak ties to production cycles. Scientific research agencies are attached to higher education systems rather than to production and service sectors as they are in industrial countries. There is a poor or missing relationship between industry and business on one hand, and academic and non-academic research institutions on the other hand, which further exacerbates the problem. Furthermore, scientific institutions have not succeeded in determining the needs and setting research priorities, and this in turn has lowered their actual impact on higher and technical educational curricula (MBRF and UNDP 2009). Both supply of and demand for science and technology are very low, and mechanisms and linkages for the promotion of such demand are weak. The inability to undertake productive teamwork to achieve the needed synergies in research has been identified as a major handicap in producing qualitative outputs (Sid-Ahmed 1999). Mobility of teachers and researchers between higher education institutions and business is in general very low. Entrepreneurship is not yet sufficiently integrated into the curriculum of higher education institutions in Arab region (Badran and Zou’bi 2010). The state of entrepreneurship education in universities is poor and far behind that not only in Western countries but also in emerging and newly developed countries (Sawahel 2012). Universities in the Arab countries do not emphasise development of the entrepreneurial spirit in their curricula. Private sector participation in R&D is very weak. Entities and industries pay attention to R&D, but mostly for the sake of promotion, compliance with national laws, or to get some benefits by way of tax exemption, as stipulated in certain tax laws in some Arab countries (El-Naser 2009). Enabling environment Institutional organisation and governance in R&D systems in Arab countries are meagre. Constraints on R&D are not limited to the weakness of institutional structures, but also include the weakness of patterns of governance, administrative arrangements and legal frameworks (ElObeidy 2013, 2014). Traditionally in Arab universities, leadership positions are filled by appointment by government authorities. University presidents are appointed directly by the country’s president, king, or prince after obtaining approval from the security agencies; deans and department heads come under the authority of the university presidents. Loyalty, regardless of qualifications and

Development in Practice

1009

competencies, is the major criteria for selection for university leadership positions. In some countries like Jordan, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, leadership appointments are for a short duration. In Egypt after the revolution in 2011, the pro-democracy academics had been pushing to revoke the regulations of appointment of university leadership positions by governmental authorities. In response, new arrangements were established to hire universities’ leaders. Under the new arrangements, presidents of universities are chosen through an electoral college, while deans of colleges and heads of departments are chosen through direct voting. During this process the faculty members voted for incentives and advantages that they were promised rather than for transforming universities and enhancing the role of universities in socio-economic development. It seems that voting by faculty members to choose the occupants of leadership positions changed universities to be like syndicates rather than educational and scientific organisations (ElObeidy 2014). Most Arab countries have done poorly at integrating intellectual property rights into their national economic policies. Some Arab countries have begun to realise the importance of intellectual property for their economic interests (Garduno and Pietrucha 2003). However, the developments relating to the protection of intellectual properties rights in these countries have generally received less attention compared to that in other developing countries. The dominant discourse on intellectual properties rights in the Arab world has mainly focused on the importance of compliance with international intellectual property right obligations and enforcement of intellectual property rights (Abdel Latif 2010). The Arab world lacks a pan-national monitor that could prepare quantitative and qualitative indices for the Arab region and guarantee the credibility of data on research and the dissemination of science and innovation within it (MBRF and UNDP 2009). In recent years, ST policymakers in a few Arab countries have tried to use quantitative data and some statistics to assess state of science and technology. Data was collected and harvested in a multitude of ways through different institutions. However, for the purpose of public accountability and policy design and assessments, Arab countries need to be able to monitor, as accurately as possible, structural shifts and recent trends pertaining to R&D and scientific and technological performance (ElObeidy 2013). Objectives of R&D strategy in Arab countries R&D strategic planning lays out a robust innovation policy that would reduce the gap between R&D and the deployment of advanced manufacturing innovations and address the full lifecycle of technology. The acceleration of R&D requires bridging a number of gaps in the present system. Enhancing science and technology systems, strengthening entrepreneurship and improving enabling environment are important elements of R&D national strategies in Arab countries. Enhancing performance of science and technology systems Governance arrangements of science and technology systems in Arab countries need to be improved. Drawing on experiences from world class universities’ governance is one of the most effective methods of reforming universities’ governance structures in Arab countries. In developed and many developing countries, selecting universities’ presidents and deans is a long process that ends with selecting the most qualified candidates for the positions. The university academic leadership candidates are typically selected by committees of experienced academic faculty members and driven by the recognition that the fate of academic programmes rests on the quality of their selection. The function of the search committee is searching for the qualified

1010

A. ElObeidy

candidates and establishment of a shortlist of the most qualified candidates. The final selection of the university president from candidates is the responsibility of a board of governance that is assisted by a faculty advisory committee. The president shall make all nominations for appointments to other leadership positions under the board of governance. The university’s board of governance or of trustees acts as the supreme governing body of the university. The board’s activities are determined by the powers, duties, and responsibilities delegated to it or conferred on it by an authority outside itself. Public colleges and universities in the United States are typically operated under the supervision of state governments. They have mostly politically appointed governing boards with an obligation to report to legislatures, governors, or state-wide boards or commissions (Lombardi et al. 2012). Mostly, members of the universities’ boards of governance are selected by the elected states’ governors. Examples include University of California, University of Maryland, University of Wisconsin, University of Texas, University of Illinois, University of Kentucky, and Cleveland State University. Trustee governance gives management powers to a trustee, usually in the form of a board of trustees. Its members are not elected from within the institution, nor do they represent the different stakeholders. The board of trustees usually has fiduciary responsibilities and due diligence in protecting the trust, including disclosing any factors that might constitute a conflict of interest with that trust (World Bank and CMI 2012). Public university board members represent the citizens of the state and the terms and conditions of their service are often defined by institutional charter or state constitution. Every state university, however, is subject to the policy control of the state legislature and often to the policy objectives of the state’s executive branch. Practically every state develops a strategic vision for its higher education system, whether expressed in the form of a master plan or a mission statement. The relevance of these strategic perspectives to state funding and system organisation varies greatly. A much more commonly pursued goal of statewide coordination of higher education is to restrain costs and reduce programme duplication to a minimum (Lombardi et al. 2012). In Switzerland, the Federal Council appoints the members and the president of the ETH (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) board and, at the request of the ETH Board, the president of the ETH Zurich as well as the directors of the research institutes. The ETH Board appoints the other members of the executive boards of the ETH Zurich and the other members of the executive boards of the research institutes. For the purposes of appointing president and directors, the ETH board makes use of a selection committee, which as a rule is chaired by the president of the ETH board (ETH Board 2012). Cambridge and Oxford are the only British universities run by a body with a majority of academics. Both universities have been under pressure for years to reform their governance to bring them in line with the structure recommended by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). HEFCE says it wants the governing body that oversees the use of its funds to be independent, and not potentially conflicted about how and where those funds are used. In the case of these universities, with their councils dominated by people from within the collegiate university, those members have a potential vested interest in the application of the funds, and are not demonstrably acting primarily on behalf of the public interest. This is in contrast to almost every other higher education institution in the country, and in contrast to the bulk of publicly funded bodies in all sectors (MacLeod 2009). Governance debates at Oxford and Cambridge have considered the inclusion of more lay members at the highest levels of their institutional governance (Evans 2009; Boggs 2010). Improving the process of selecting candidates for university leadership positions in Arab countries will ensure selecting the most qualified university leaders who can contribute in academic reform and achieving the universities’ role in higher education and scientific research.

Development in Practice

1011

In addition, selecting universities’ leaders based on qualifications could enhance competitiveness among faculty members. All universities and research institutes in the region need to be re-envisioned. Curricula of these organisations need to be transformed for their activities to be market-driven. Research needs to be directed towards the country’s needs for growth and development. More attention should be paid to the outcomes of higher education in order to produce employable graduates and to bridge the gap between education supply and market demand. Transformation begins with an analysis of the situation to provide an opportunity to gather, analyse, and report data on all aspects related to research and learning, and economy and community needs. The situation analysis provides an opportunity to examine capability and effectiveness of universities or research institutes. It also involves an examination of outcomes and socio-economic impacts. Curriculum assessment can demonstrate the effectiveness of the current programme and identify aspects of the curriculum that need to be transformed. Universities’ transformation will include management, academic staff, programmes, research, courses, training, and linkages with the community and industry. Strategic frameworks of the universities should include defining mission, vision, and aims according to community needs, not according to what universities acquire. In private universities, there should be a functional legislative framework to ensure transparency and accountability. Legislation can offer the basis for rights and responsibilities in private universities (Sabry 2009). Monitoring the state of science and technology becomes a major challenge for the Arab countries in their endeavours for developing the knowledge-based economy (MBRF and UNDP 2009). The growing importance of monitoring science and technology in Arab countries has spurred the need for more and better information on inputs, processes, outputs, and impacts related to science and technology. However because of their intangible nature, scientific knowledge and technical advances are difficult to identify and measure. Obtaining reliable facts and figures on science and technology requires a series of interrelated indicators to provide a composite picture. Science and technology statistics and performance indicators become the necessary tools for evaluating various stages of science and technology performance, for setting benchmarks, and for monitoring and impact assessment. Science and technology indicators are crucial for monitoring scientific and technological development and useful for formulating, adjusting, and implementing science and technology policies. Indicators can also be used to monitor global technological trends, conduct foresight exercises, and determine specific areas of investment (UNESCO 2010). In recent years, science and technology policymakers in a few Arab countries have tried to use quantitative data and statistics to assess the state of science and technology. Several science and technology indicators were used, such as rate of publications, number of patents, and number or researchers. However, impact has not been used as an indicator of science and technology. Data were collected and harvested in a multitude of ways through different institutions. However, for the purpose of public accountability and policy design and assessments, the Arab countries need to be able to monitor, as accurately as possible, structural shifts and recent trends pertaining to R&D and scientific and technological performance (ElObeidy 2010). To ensure that the science and technology indicators and information gathering as well as collation, compilation, and validation are standardised, national science and technology observatories should be established. Having a science and technology observatory was raised as an institutional imperative, as it can manage the collection of science and technology statistics and performance indicators. The main task of the observatory of science and technology would be to produce quantitative indicators on research development and innovation systems for stakeholders and

1012

A. ElObeidy

policymakers. Science and technology observatory provides feedback to policymakers on the trends of science and technology indicators for strategic analysis (ElObeidy 2010). Each Arab country needs to establish and run its own national science and technology observatory. The scope and methods of the national observatory should be tailored to the specific needs and conditions of each country. The observatory would carry out activities of collecting, processing, and analysing information relevant to science and technology. Strengthening entrepreneurship Despite its importance, entrepreneurship is not always actively encouraged in Arab countries through dedicated policy initiatives (UNCTAD 2014). Universities’ curriculum development process in Arab countries needs integration of knowledge, skills, and values. Universities are urged to overhaul academic disciplines in order to ensure that entrepreneurship education is embedded in every subject. A framework for delivering entrepreneurship education across the whole institution needs to be developed. Through transformation, universities and technical institutions can integrate entrepreneurship as an important part of the curriculum, spread across different subjects, and require or encourage students to take entrepreneurship courses. Special attention needs to be paid to systematically integrating entrepreneurship training into scientific and technical studies. It is important that the purpose of the programme is precisely defined, and that it is geared to the expected outcomes. Integration of entrepreneurship into the curriculum needs to be the vision for a higher education institution as part of its wider mission. It is important also to involve as many stakeholders as possible in the provision of entrepreneurship education. Developing entrepreneurial teaching and learning practices demands a shift from transmission models of teaching (learning “about”) to experiential learning (learning “for”) and offers students techniques that can be applied in the real world. The relevance of entrepreneurship education should be increased across a more diverse range of subjects and disciplines (NESTA, NCGE, and CIHE 2008). The transfer of new knowledge could be enhanced by close networking between universities and industry. Partnership between universities and research institutes and industry sectors is important for defining needs and priorities of research and transferring the needed technology to the end users. Creating links between knowledge generation and enterprise development is one of the greatest challenges facing the Arab region. Initiatives targeting the networking between research and industry need to be developed at all levels. The networking activities include supporting nongovernmental and governmental agencies in driving the technology demand side and organising conferences, seminars, workshops, and forums, which bring together companies and investors from one side, and universities and research institutes from the other side. In addition, academic researchers need to communicate effectively with the industry. Indeed, successful entrepreneurship is more likely where stakeholder relationships provide learning opportunities and facilitate the creation and exchange of tacit knowledge. Continuing education or lifelong learning can provide opportunities to maintain and enhance the professional knowledge and competency and performance of employees. Continuing education can also provide opportunities to help employees receive consultation, support, and counsel from peers. Continuing education can promote the development of resources and networks for the ongoing learning of employees. Continuing education permits the updating and renewal of knowledge and practical abilities and skills in the occupational field, and enables individuals to adapt to technological changes in their occupation or to enter another occupation. Continuous learning could be sustained through stronger relationships with stakeholders. Continuing technical and vocational education programmes through the distance learning model need to be promoted for the

Development in Practice

1013

benefit of those disadvantaged by distance and location, such as individuals in rural communities and those engaged in seasonal work (UNESCO 2001). The business and education sectors must work in close partnership to increase the likelihood of achieving their shared aims. Access to an appropriately skilled and qualified workforce is a vital component of a stable economy, so there is a real need for effective cooperation between the education and business sectors. Improving enabling environment Improving the enabling environment for R&D requires true and effective partnership between governments and their private sector in sharing this responsibility. Arab governments need to provide macro-economic stability and set up the necessary legal system and regulatory framework (El-Naser 2009). Trust-building measures and a legal framework to promote knowledge sharing need to be introduced (Ahmad and Daghfous 2010). Regulatory framework conditions have been identified as important factors influencing the innovation activities of companies, industries, and whole economies. Policies to improve the regulatory framework conditions are becoming more important. The most relevant example is the regime of intellectual property rights, especially patents (Blind 2012). There is a need for Arab countries to adopt a more development-oriented perspective on intellectual property in the wider context of its relation to other public policy objectives and overall development efforts (Abdel Latif 2010). The development, operation, and maintenance of infrastructure, including ICT, services, transport networks, and financial systems are all essential to the successful expansion of R&D activities in Arab countries. The role of the private sector in R&D needs to be strengthened. Mobilisation of private sector resources within the Arab world to boost innovation and infrastructure development is essential to achieve long-term goals of competitiveness. However, in order to motivate the private sector, the establishment of a reordered regulatory framework and the introduction of competitive markets and commercial practices into the related sectors are essential steps to enhance the innovative role of the private sector (El-Naser 2009). Economic legislations appropriate for the private sector need to be provided. Obstacles that prevent the private sector from playing an active role in economic development and in working towards economic integration need to be removed (Sabry 2009). To ensure that the science and technology indicators and information gathering as well as collation, compilation, and validation are standardised, national science and technology observatories need to be established in all Arab countries. The scope and methods of the national observatory should be tailored to the specific needs and conditions of each country (ElObeidy 2013). The impact of science and technology on R&D is an important indicator in this regard. Notes on contributor Ahmed A. ElObeidy graduated with a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois and has worked as a professor at Cairo University, United Arab Emirates University, and King Saud University. He worked internationally as a Chief Technical Advisor for capacity building with FAO, as Senior Information Technology Officer for Science & Technology Research with UN-ESCWA, and as a Team Leader for strategies with UNDP.

References Abdel Latif, A. 2010. “IP and Sustainable Development: Development Agendas in a Changing World.” InformatIon note number 17, June 2010. ICTSD Programme on IPRs and Sustainable Development. Edward Elgar Publishing. Accessed June 1, 2013. http://www.e-elgar.co.uk

1014

A. ElObeidy

Ahmad, N., and A. Daghfous. 2010. “Knowledge Sharing through Inter-Organizational Knowledge Networks: Challenges and Opportunities in the United Arab Emirates.” European Business Review 22 (2): 153–174. Alreck, P. L., and R. B. Settle. 1995. “The Survey Research Handbook”: Guidelines and Strategies for Conducting a Survey. 2nd ed. Illinois: Burr Ridge. Badran, A., and M. R. Zou’bi. 2010. “UNESCO Science Report”, The current Status of Science Around the World. Chapter 13: Arab States, UNESCO, Paris, France. Bhattacharjee, Y. 2011. “Saudi Universities Offer Cash in Exchange for Academic Prestige.” Science 334 (60–61): 1344–1345. Bisson, P., E. Stephenson, and S. P. Viguerie. 2010. “The Productivity Imperative.” McKinsey Quarterly, June 2010. Bivens, M. 2013. “Rude VC: Copying Silicon Valley.” Rude Baguette, France’s Startup Blog. Accessed January 17, 2014. http://www.rudebaguette.com Blind, K. 2012. “The Impact of Regulation on Innovation.” Nesta Working Paper No. 12/02. Manchester Institute of Innovation Research. Accessed June 1, 2013. www.nesta.org.uk/wp12-02 Boggs, A. M. 2010. “Understanding the Origins, Evolution and State of Play in UK University Governance.” The New Collection 5: 1–8. Cook, I. and R. Joseph. 2001. “Rethinking Silicon Valley: New Perspectives on Regional Development.” Prometheus 19 (4): 377–393. Djeflat, A. 2009. ‘Building Knowledge Economies for Job Creation, Increased Competitiveness, and Balanced Development’: Individual Country Overviews. Building 21st Century Knowledge Economies for Job Growth and Competitiveness in the Middle East. Tunis, Tunisia, World Bank Development Institute. Egyptian Ministry of Planning and International Co-operation. 2011. ‘Recent Trends in Egypt’s ODA With Special Reference to the Scientific Research Sector’, Development Co-operation Report. El-Naser, H. K. 2009. “The Future of Innovation: Infrastructure and Competitiveness.” The Future of Innovation. Accessed June 1, 2013. http://thefutureofinnovation.org ElObeidy, A. A. 2010. “Towards Bridging the Technology Gap in the Arab Region.” International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management 10 (3–6): 239–257. ElObeidy, A. A. 2013. “Scientific System in the Arab Region: From Prestige Towards Development.” Regional Science Policy & Practice 5 (1): 97–112. ElObeidy, A. A. 2014. “Democratic reform in Egyptian universities.” International Higher Education (74) (winter, 2014): 25–27. ESCWA. 1998. “Assessment of Research and Development in Selected ESCWA Member Countries.” Local Technological Inputs. Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, New York. ETH Board. 2012. “Election Procedure, ETH Board, Governance ETH Domain.” Accessed June 1, 2013. http://www.ethrat.ch/en Evans, G. R. 2009. “And Now What About Reforming Cambridge Governance?.” Higher Education Review 41 (2): 3–22. Garduno, E., and F. J. Pietrucha. 2003. “Intellectual Rights in the Arab World.” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 4 (1): 57–63. King Absulaziz University. 2013. “National Plan for Science and Technologies.” King Absulaziz University. Accessed June 1, 2013. http://dsr.kau.edu.sa Lombardi, J. V., D. D. Craig, E. D. Capaldi, and D. S. Gater. 2012. “University Organization, Governance, and Competitiveness.” The Top American Research Universities. An Annual Report from the Lombardi Program on Measuring University Performance. USA. MBRF and UNDP. 2009. ‘Arab Knowledge Report 2009: Towards Productive Intercommunication for Knowledge’, Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Foundation and United Nations Development Programme, Al Ghurair Printing & Publishing House L.L.C, Dubai, UAE. MacLeod, D. 2009. “Cambridge Dons Retain Control of University, Funding Council Insists they Provide more Information about How They Spend Their Money.” The Guardian, March 20. Guardian.co.uk. NESTA, NCGE and CIHE. 2008. “Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates, Putting Entrepreneurship at the Centre of Higher Education.” The National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (NESTA), the National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE) and the Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE) joint report, London, UK. Nour, S. S. 2013. “Regional Systems of Innovation in the Arab Region.” UNU-MERIT Working Papers#2013-012. UNU-MERIT, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Development in Practice

1015

Sabry, M. 2009. “Funding Policy and Higher Education in Arab Countries.” Comparative & International Higher Education 1: 11–12. Sasson, A. 2007. “Research and Development in the Arab States: The Impact of Globalization, Facts and Perspectives.” Presented at the Regional Seminar “The Impact of Globalization on Higher Education and Research in the Arab States”, UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge, HED/POL/2007/PI/26. Saudi Ministry of Economy and Planning. 2010. “The Ninth Development Plan 2010–2014.” Saudi Ministry of Economy and Planning. Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Ministry of Economy and Planning. Sawahel, W. 2012. “Arab States: Higher education after the uprisings.” University World News, (203). Accessed January 5, 2014. http://www.universityworldnews.com Schwalje, W. 2011. “Knowledge-based Economic Development as a Unifying Vision in a Post-awakening Arab World.” MPRA Paper 30305, University Library of Munich, Germany. Schwalje, W. 2012. “The Knowledge-Based Economy and the Failure of the Arab Dream: What the !#%@ Happened?.” Social Science Research Network, Working papers series, 24 May, 2012. Accessed June 1, 2013. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2065855 Segarra, D. 2011. “The (little) Science of the Arab World. Global Talent Newsletter Scientific Policies Reports.” Accessed June 1, 2013. http://www.en.globaltalentnews.com Sid-Ahmed, M. 1999. “Review of Antoine Zahlan’s Work ‘The Challenges of Science and Technology, Progress Without Change’.” Al-Ahram Weekly, 14–20 October, 1999. UNCTAD. 2014. “Investment and Enterprise, Formulating National Entrepreneurship Strategy.” United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Geneva 10, Switzerland. Accessed February 12, 2014. http://unctad.org UNDP. 2003. “Arab Human Development Report 2003.” New York: United Nations Development Programme, Regional Bureau for Arab States. UNESCO. 2001. “Technical and Vocational Education and Training for the Twenty-first Century.” UNESCO recommendations. UNESCO, Section for Technical and Vocational Education, Paris, France. UNESCO. 2009. “National Strategy of Science, Technology and Innovation 2009–2015.” UNESCO Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe. Accessed January 30, 2014. http://portal.unesco.org UNESCO. 2010. The UNESCO Science Report 2010: The Current Status of Science Around the World. Paris, France: UNESCO. Wilkens, K. 2011. “Higher Education Reform in the Arab World. Brookings Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic world.” The Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings. World Bank and CMI. 2012. “Universities Through the Looking Glass: Benchmarking University Governance to Enable Higher Education Modernization in MENA.” World Bank and Center for Mediterranean Integration (CMI) joint report No. 69071. World Economic Forum and OECD. 2011. “The Arab World Competitiveness Report 2011–2012.” World Economic Forum and the OECD, Geneva, Switzerland. World Economic Forum and OECD. 2011. The Accelerating Entrepreneurship in the Arab World. World Economic Forum and OECD, Geneva, Switzerland.

Copyright of Development in Practice is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.