Comments on: Building an ICT R&D Eco-System in Pakistan: A Conversation with Dr. Qasim Sheikh (Part 1-of-2)

By: (Re-)Designing the National ICT R&D Fund | STEP - Science, Technology, and Education in Pakistan

Tue, 19 Oct 2010 22:43:37 +0000

[...] Dr. Qasim Sheikh, the-then CEO of the National ICT R&D Fund. The interview is available here (Part 1) and here (Part [...]

By: usman rafique

usman rafique — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 07:57:35 +0000

I think both fundemental and commercially centered research can be done in parallel. Commerically centered research should be done by funds provided by industry and fundamental research can be funded by funds from public tax monney, regional based funds (ASEAN level). There should be separate organizations for both kinds of research and within those organizations there should be separate departments for each discipline. End product of fundamental research should be publications and commercial centered research end product should be prototypes. These prototypes can be transferred to industry or create start ups.

By: Hassan

Hassan — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:16:33 +0000

I disagree with Affan. The priority of the fund should focus on creating actual, tangible economic value for a nation. Cutting Edge research cannot – and indeed should not – be pursued by underdeveloped nations. Funding research that is likely to bring immediate benefit to Pakistan – ie comercially viable, value creating etc – may seem like a short-termist view, but it is the correct first step in developing Pakistan’s research capabilities.

It is not sensible for Pakistan’s research community to be lavishly funded for research output that is purely academic in scope. Regardless of the potential long-term benefits.

By: Affan

Affan — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 03:47:06 +0000

I would like to voice concern regarding the singular focus on innovation centric research. While there is no doubt that non-value adding research is not worth investing money in it.There can, however, still be research that has value; just not industrial/commercial but instead academic and human resource development. I see two ways that the existing approach can be detrimental to developing a strong academic and research culture in Pakistan:

1. Academic freedom in the choice of research is a very important aspect from the point of view of any recent graduate or returning faculty. A very basic question that any US or outside Pakistan researcher would ask is whether, on taking academic position in Pakistan, he will have research funding to continue doing research at the same level as if he/she had stayed behind in Pakistan, thus maintaining his visibility in his/her field. Such reputation can only be obtained by publishing at the best conferences, which in many cases do not necessarily look at purely commercial/industrial research as the best quality. Even if such papers are accepted, they invariable form a small fraction and thus you limit the scope of research possible to a returning faculty member. Such negative points can tilt the balance for many potential good researchers, and therefore faculty, in Pakistan. This negatively affect the human-resource development value chain.

2. Many seminal and cutting edge research ideas, for which there is generally no existing commercial need, would never be funded and consequently researched in Pakistan. Is not the fundamental purpose of research sector in any country to push the envelop and develop new technologies, worrying little about commercialization? (think Internet)

It seems that the current view point is based on the Stanford/MIT model where most all research has strong industrial/commercial and academic affinity. But there are several top universities and a lot of top-level research that does not need those direct connections.

A good approach, in my mind, would be to strike a balance between both type of proposals that add to the overall value chain of research in Pakistan. In NSF proposals, other than the direct impact of research proposals need to identify the “Broader impact” of a proposal, which can cover either the commercial aspect of a more academic-oriented proposal or the academic impact of an industry-oriented one.