Ideas to improve R&D in Pakistan

[peagle]

That requires cultural change over multiple years beyond officers - the idea that if you dispute an elder even if your logic and basis for argument is strong is bad manners is one of the most toxic and destructive aspects of Pakistani society.

I find that regressive thinking is especially prevalent in all developing countries, and still is the norm in developed Asian nations such as Japan and South Korea. It is indeed very much a cultural thing and requires time to root out.

Israeli leadership has largely been European in its heritage, and also Jewish purely by identity without following strict religious dogma. That heritage and freedom in how they view religious dictates allowed them to develop a more open culture accepting of ideas.
That need was expedited by having a large number of enemies at the doorstep, so for them it was essentially do or die moment. That resulted in the innovative and open environment they now have. That thinking or mind-set naturally transferred to the private sector because every citizen serves in the armed forces, and takes the lessons he/she learnt into the civilian economy.

We do not have the same set of circumstances, but we can take lessons and apply them to our situation, once we decide to take action.

 

[EternalMortal]

I mostly agree with what @Goenitz has to say. I think asking for R&D in Pakistan is putting the cart before the horse. I feel like that's what we do for a lot of things. For example, we'll build a university building and think about faculty and teaching later or maybe never.

The reason I say focusing on R&D is the cart is because @313ghazi as your post makes abundantly clear is that Pakistan lacks "industry-academia" linkage and the reason for this is glaringly simple - there is little to no industry. So IMHO funding most kinds of R&D will not generate value for Pakistan but for corporations outside of Pakistan that can take advantage of the R&D. This already happens with our wholesale production of engineers (BS, MS, PhD) basically to export or for underemployment as technicians or managers.

My conclusion: there needs to be some level of industrialization before we can talk about R&D because otherwise we are just coming up with a new way to waste money and send our money/talent abroad. How to industrialize in this day and age is another debate that I frankly don't know enough about to not say something stupid. This is better left to policy and economics people.

It is my belief that once there are industries present, R&D grows organically as corporations race to outdo the competition in innovation and go to universities for talent and research.

Perhaps follow Israel's YOZMA program? Invite investors (both local & foreign) to set up fund(s). Gov provides a percentage of the fund (as much as it can afford). Each investor owns a stake according to the amount the invested including the gov. Shares of the fund can be bought and sold as normal. Easy for our gov to start b/c you could start with whatever amount you have available & can scale up as you generate more money.

 

[JamD]

Perhaps follow Israel's YOZMA program? Invite investors (both local & foreign) to set up fund(s). Gov provides a percentage of the fund (as much as it can afford). Each investor owns a stake according to the amount the invested including the gov. Shares of the fund can be bought and sold as normal. Easy for our gov to start b/c you could start with whatever amount you have available & can scale up as you generate more money.

I think you missed my point, which was you even if by a snap of your fingers you can suddently generate lots of amazing research but if it has nowhere (actual industry) to go at best it will fuel innovation abroad and at worst be useless.

 

[Goenitz]

@That Guy @SQ8 @peagle @JamD

Dr AQ Khan, didn't reject the claim despite how much naive the claim was (proved fraud later). He emphasised that if one is claiming, investigate it, as perhaps there can be a side phenomena which a non engineer cannot explain, but aiding the process.

That should be the attitude of a senior when an enthusiast young internee comes with ridiculous results of an experiment. A supervisor should not reject the results but inquire what are the inputs, apparatus settings, etc so the internee can find out that he made the mistake in the setup.

This is easy for science but a lot of team work and discussion is required in economics, management as these things are so fluid.

 

[Pak Nationalist]

We all agree that very little research and development is done in Pakistan, and I was thinking how we could improve that. I had a few ideas I wanted to share with you and get your thoughts.

1. Regulation - We need regulation that ties the university status of each university to research. There should not be any universities in our country not creating PHD students. There perhaps should be a percentage of the intake that should be going onto PHD studies, although this must be kept very small, we want to encourage quality not quantity.

2. Funding. Govt must be willing to fund cost of living of phD students in STEM subjects or the type of research we consider required to national interest. Students and professors should be able to put together funding requests and state why they think thier work is beneficial to society and why society should cover their cost of living.. This could also cover arts, but it will cover it in a level proportional to national requirement, not on desires of students.

3. University-industry links. I want to see this in three areas.

a. Govt should give tax refunds of 50% of any amount a business contributes to a university for research and development. So if Malik Riaz gives 10 billion pkr to a university for research, then he can expect 5 billion refunded from his taxes. There should be checks and balances to ensure this money goes into phd costs, not towards university profits, or buying land and building hostels and gyms.

b. I'd like to see industry work in collaboration with universities to do their own research. If your company wants to do research, work with university professors. The work could be part funded by you, part funded by the university, and if they can make a case for it, govt could contribute up to 20% of the cost. It'd be win win for the universities who get part funded research, the companies who get part funded research and the state who gets r&D on the cheap.

c. Employability scores for university graduates on a course by course basis. Also industry approval of courses or faculties. This would encourage universities to revise their content and keep it relevant. it would also mean students could have a better idea of the quality of the education they're paying for, because ultimately they want it to lead to employment and finally it would benefit companies because they would have graduates who are more capable of hitting the ground running.

I could do a whole other topic on employability of graduates and the future of higher education and industry, but for now this is what i want to focus on.

What do you think?

a) Is a good idea, however, with an already low tax base, giving more refunds would decrease the state's own revenue generation effort. It could be argued that the benefit of creating new knowledge could have a commercial value ( eg. patents and commercialization of those patents), but not all research yields dividends or at least dividends upfront. It is kind of like the oil and gas exploration sector. You do not strike oil every time you drill. Valuable research takes time to develop and mature into something substantive enough for society to accrue benefits from it. Not sure the Pakistani governments would be too patient in this regard and sacrifice the revenue these could generate in an election cycle for (possible) long-term scientific/economic gains.

b) I do not know about other varsities but my alma mater in Pakistan is engaged with the textile industry and even Services (Mr. Mukhtar's; PPP leader and ex- defense minister) industry in doing research on biobased composites. It is a public sector university. This is the way to go. A problem that is pervasive in academia in Pakistan in my view is churning out of low-quality research in bulk (I am not even talking about the unethical practices that are being reported with high frequency these days in print and electronic media) just so the principal investigators could bag a promotion/incentive. Quantity is the currency of the time rather than the quality. My view is that any promotions and recruitments in academia should be linked to having a certain number of publications in high-impact factor journals. Similarly, Masters and Ph.D. awards should also be coupled with getting published in medium to high impact factor journals. The problem is that quality research (the type that gets published in such journals) does not come cheap. Higher education would require significant investment. As the things stand, since 2007, each government has subjected HEC before anything else to funding cuts to create fiscal space. That is the priority education in general and higher education, in particular, has this country (for every single government, tall promises in manifestos notwithstanding). HEC has in turn forced varsities to create their own avenues of funding. Universities have done this by starting dozens of programs. My own varsity was specialized in textile education, but with HEC hardpressed and in turn, pressing public sector varsities, it had to offer programs in computer sciences and business administration (absolute nonsense). Then the public sector varsities literally contracted the private sector to open (& administer) their sub-campuses all over the country. One cannot even begin to imagine the "quality" of graduates these BUSINESSES are churning out now. This rant might seem out of place but people should know the current state of affairs before they talk about how to fix a broken system. First public schools were destroyed, then public high schools (secondary schools, colleges), and now public sector higher education (undergraduate level) is at a point of no return.

 

[peagle]

I think you missed my point, which was you even if by a snap of your fingers you can suddently generate lots of amazing research but if it has nowhere (actual industry) to go at best it will fuel innovation abroad and at worst be useless.

Just to explore your point further.

I understand what you are saying, but why should one step follow the other, surely a well executed step can create unforeseen benefits.

Israel's start-up industry started in the 1990 I think, at that time it had a population of less then 5 million, and a per capita income far below what it is today. I don't think it had the mature industrial base to take advantage, but creating that start-up eco-system allowed it to expand it's technological base and generate revenue in other ways, contributing to the overall economy. Similarly other countries have invested in totally new sectors which paid off in the long term.

Why would that same logic not apply to Pakistan, if Pakistan was to take R&D seriously, identify and adopt the correct approach, and allow it to take it's course. There is no need to spend the billions, which obviously we do not have, but anything is a start.
It will have two scenarios,
once the start-ups start delivering, if the efforts go abroad then fine, we create influence aboard and gain influence in so many other ways, respect and recognition for Pakistani technology, respect for Pakistani talent/workers and so many other ways. Which will bring in more investment, likely in other sectors as well, because of our large population. The unforeseen benefits.

Or, once the new technology starts showing results, the industry will build as well, it could well be that start-ups instigate industrial development. The industry might well be a few steps behind the potential offered by the start-ups but over time the environment will balance itself.
Pakistan is a large country, given the right environment, different sectors can try to achieve mastery and take along other sectors, rather then wait in a queue.

Just for sake of exploration, why wouldn't this approach still be workable, when it has worked in other countries.

 

[peagle]

a) Is a good idea, however, with an already low tax base, giving more refunds would decrease the state's own revenue generation effort. It could be argued that the benefit of creating new knowledge could have a commercial value ( eg. patents and commercialization of those patents), but not all research yields dividends or at least dividends upfront. It is kind of like the oil and gas exploration sector. You do not strike oil every time you drill. Valuable research takes time to develop and mature into something substantive enough for society to accrue benefits from it. Not sure the Pakistani governments would be too patient in this regard and sacrifice the revenue these could generate in an election cycle for (possible) long-term scientific/economic gains.

b) I do not know about other varsities but my alma mater in Pakistan is engaged with the textile industry and even Services (Mr. Mukhtar's; PPP leader and ex- defense minister) industry in doing research on biobased composites. It is a public sector university. This is the way to go. A problem that is pervasive in academia in Pakistan in my view is churning out of low-quality research in bulk (I am not even talking about the unethical practices that are being reported with high frequency these days in print and electronic media) just so the principal investigators could bag a promotion/incentive. Quantity is the currency of the time rather than the quality. My view is that any promotions and recruitments in academia should be linked to having a certain number of publications in high-impact factor journals. Similarly, Masters and Ph.D. awards should also be coupled with getting published in medium to high impact factor journals. The problem is that quality research (the type that gets published in such journals) does not come cheap. Higher education would require significant investment. As the things stand, since 2007, each government has subjected HEC before anything else to funding cuts to create fiscal space. That is the priority education in general and higher education, in particular, has this country (for every single government, tall promises in manifestos notwithstanding). HEC has in turn forced varsities to create their own avenues of funding. Universities have done this by starting dozens of programs. My own varsity was specialized in textile education, but with HEC hardpressed and in turn, pressing public sector varsities, it had to offer programs in computer sciences and business administration (absolute nonsense). Then the public sector varsities literally contracted the private sector to open (& administer) their sub-campuses all over the country. One cannot even begin to imagine the "quality" of graduates these BUSINESSES are churning out now. This rant might seem out of place but people should know the current state of affairs before they talk about how to fix a broken system. First public schools were destroyed, then public high schools (secondary schools, colleges), and now public sector higher education (undergraduate level) is at a point of no return.

What you have outlined are the problems, the complaints.

Allow me to request,
lets for an instance imagine we could do something, within the available resources, what would you say would be beneficial towards taking steps that could create an environment and a culture for R&D.

Every country had to start the R&D journey at some point, each has followed their own journey, which journey would you recommend for Pakistan?
It matters not how big or small, or how practical or useless, something you think with the right approach would be a right direction in our circumstances.
Something that will get as going, even just standing up.

 

[SQ8]

@That Guy @SQ8 @peagle @JamD

Dr AQ Khan, didn't reject the claim despite how much naive the claim was (proved fraud later). He emphasised that if one is claiming, investigate it, as perhaps there can be a side phenomena which a non engineer cannot explain, but aiding the process.

That should be the attitude of a senior when an enthusiast young internee comes with ridiculous results of an experiment. A supervisor should not reject the results but inquire what are the inputs, apparatus settings, etc so the internee can find out that he made the mistake in the setup.

This is easy for science but a lot of team work and discussion is required in economics, management as these things are so fluid.

Every claim should be investigated - but given some initial thought as well. Water car engineer should have had someone with 2-3 years experience go out and scout it and then basically brief the decision committee on it.

 

[Pak Nationalist]

What you have outlined are the problems, the complaints.

Allow me to request,
lets for an instance imagine we could do something, within the available resources, what would you say would be beneficial towards taking steps that could create an environment and a culture for R&D.

Every country had to start the R&D journey at some point, each has followed their own journey, which journey would you recommend for Pakistan?
It matters not how big or small, or how practical or useless, something you think with the right approach would be a right direction in our circumstances.
Something that will get as going, even just standing up.

I am of the view that everything in Pakistan is linked to the small size of the pie. When the pie's size is limited, you keep fighting on ways to distribute shares from that pie to different sectors. This is like chasing a kid who stole a mango from your cart while an adult loads the entire cart while you chase the child in his truck and scrams. Increasing exports and collecting more taxes by broadening the tax collection base are the two avenues for increasing the size of the pie. When the pie's size increases, you could invest more in education in general and higher education in particular. The more you add sugar to the tea, the sweeter it would become. In a nutshell, with large-scale investments in the research capabilities of varsities (human development, physical infrastructure, setting up of world-class labs equipped with world-class equipment that could support cutting edge scientific research, you cannot rationally expect to create valuable knowledge). So, the provision of resources is the centerpiece. Once that is done, things would sort themselves out with effective management of those resources.

Secondly, in the present state, the industrial sector should have the foresight to invest in academia to add value to its own products and services. Corporate management in this country must reach that level. Family-owned businesses that define the Pakistani manufacturing scene seldom have that foresight or appetite for risk. They have to realize that expending capital on research would make their own businesses more profitable and competitive.

As with other things in this country, the state's outsized role might even be required here. GoP/provincial governments could become partners in projects under various ministries. The famed public-private partnership model could be used as a template in academic research as well where both the public and private sectors share the cost of scientific research in academia. In effect, the state would be subsidizing the academia-driven research that improves the productivity of our industries. This could incentivize the usually risk-averse family-owned manufacturing enterprises to spare cash for research that could add value to their portfolio. My two cents.

 

[Goenitz]

I don't think it had the mature industrial base to take advantage, but creating that start-up eco-system allowed it to expand it's technological base and generate revenue in other ways, contributing to the overall economy. Similarly other countries have invested in totally new sectors which paid off in the long term.

The only take is small units/city as these are easy to control. That is why centralisation is not good. Be it UAE, Singapore, Isreal.. A good team or leadership of small projects can do wonder, as no matter how intelligent one can be, if given a lot of duties and responsibilities, will fail.

Water car engineer should have had someone with 2-3 years experience go out and scout it and then basically brief the decision committee on it.

He was fraud since beginning, and he hid the hydrogen carbide addition in the water. I am sure Dr AQ Khan knew that what Engr said is against 2nd thermo law, but his insistence to 'give a chance' attitude is needed in our senior management. It gives confidence to new comer to think out of the box.

 

[JamD]

Just to explore your point further.

I understand what you are saying, but why should one step follow the other, surely a well executed step can create unforeseen benefits.

Yes that is always a possibility. In my opinion this won't work for Pakistan because I think in a place like Pakistan where very little works the way it should and people pride themselves on gaming whatever system they face, unforeseen effects will be negative. Unforeseen benefits are possible in places where a lot of the things already work, there's a strong precendent for things and systems working.

Pakistan was a country that needed some higher education institutes. But nobody actually calculated/projected how many we needed and we've been making new university buildings/pyramid schemes like a mad person with no direction in mind. We have widespread academic corruption with paper mills and state land being used for commercial purposes by universities. These are the kinds of unforeseen things I've seen in Pakistan, not the good kind. I'd be extremely happy to be proven wrong. Trust me.

Israel's start-up industry started in the 1990 I think, at that time it had a population of less then 5 million, and a per capita income far below what it is today. I don't think it had the mature industrial base to take advantage, but creating that start-up eco-system allowed it to expand it's technological base and generate revenue in other ways, contributing to the overall economy. Similarly other countries have invested in totally new sectors which paid off in the long term.

Why would that same logic not apply to Pakistan,

Well that's super easy to answer. Israel is was a small and extremely proposperous country with extremely high education (not just literacy), whereas Pakistan is a very poor country with a large illiterate population and a very very small affluent and rent-seeking upper class.

if Pakistan was to take R&D seriously, identify and adopt the correct approach, and allow it to take it's course. There is no need to spend the billions,

Easier said than done. What does that even mean? What's the correct approach? Let's assume magically we get amazing R&D capacity for the sake of argument. What happens next?

There is no need to spend the billions, which obviously we do not have, but anything is a start.
It will have two scenarios,
once the start-ups start delivering, if the efforts go abroad then fine, we create influence aboard and gain influence in so many other ways, respect and recognition for Pakistani technology, respect for Pakistani talent/workers and so many other ways. Which will bring in more investment, likely in other sectors as well, because of our large population. The unforeseen benefits.

Again this would work for a country that had at least SOME reverse brain drain too..look at India...good example is China. These countries have sustainable generation of talent of which a lot of goes abroad. With Pakistan absolutely NO ONE is coming back. EVERYTHING is going out. The quality of teaching is constantly going down and thus the quality of talent is also going down - since no one is coming back so that they can be poorer and be harassed for being competent. The way things are going, very quickly Pakistan will run out of talent to export.

This is what I see very closely being involved in academics.

Or, once the new technology starts showing results, the industry will build as well, it could well be that start-ups instigate industrial development. The industry might well be a few steps behind the potential offered by the start-ups but over time the environment will balance itself.

Yes that's a possibility. But here is where our absolutely nonexistent corporate law enforcement, corruption, rent-seeking economy that invests in real-estate only, and 0 access to capital will come in to smother any possibility of a business growing (except maybe fintech that don't need capital). I would like to believe what you say and it would make me happier but unfortunately, I have seen the opposite of that happening.

Pakistan is a large country, given the right environment, different sectors can try to achieve mastery and take along other sectors, rather then wait in a queue.

And this is what I am on about really. THAT is the key. And what does that mean? Well you need:
1. A functioning judicial system that can deal with corporate cases QUICKLY
2. Policies that discourage rent-seeking behavior like our people's and state's obsession with real estate

Just for sake of exploration, why wouldn't this approach still be workable, when it has worked in other countries.

I think you're comparing Pakistan with the wrong countries. ZAB absolutely wrecked our industrial base. We have no leg to stand on. We need legs first.

 

[SQ8]

I find that regressive thinking is especially prevalent in all developing countries, and still is the norm in developed Asian nations such as Japan and South Korea. It is indeed very much a cultural thing and requires time to root out.

Israeli leadership has largely been European in its heritage, and also Jewish purely by identity without following strict religious dogma. That heritage and freedom in how they view religious dictates allowed them to develop a more open culture accepting of ideas.
That need was expedited by having a large number of enemies at the doorstep, so for them it was essentially do or die moment. That resulted in the innovative and open environment they now have. That thinking or mind-set naturally transferred to the private sector because every citizen serves in the armed forces, and takes the lessons he/she learnt into the civilian economy.

We do not have the same set of circumstances, but we can take lessons and apply them to our situation, once we decide to take action.

Another aspect is that no other threat to life exists - for the most part if it wasn’t for terrorism and diseases Pakistanis will not die of hunger. Food is abundant despite the struggles of many poor who at some point or another will be fed. The mindset to innovate comes from a lack of any movement up Maslows pyramid(my favorite example). So the desires keep oscillating even up to the elite on food, shelter and sex to only climb up that pyramid in certain cases.

 

[peagle]

Yes that is always a possibility. In my opinion this won't work for Pakistan because I think in a place like Pakistan where very little works the way it should and people pride themselves on gaming whatever system they face, unforeseen effects will be negative. Unforeseen benefits are possible in places where a lot of the things already work, there's a strong precendent for things and systems working.

Pakistan was a country that needed some higher education institutes. But nobody actually calculated/projected how many we needed and we've been making new university buildings/pyramid schemes like a mad person with no direction in mind. We have widespread academic corruption with paper mills and state land being used for commercial purposes by universities. These are the kinds of unforeseen things I've seen in Pakistan, not the good kind. I'd be extremely happy to be proven wrong. Trust me.




Well that's super easy to answer. Israel is was a small and extremely proposperous country with extremely high education (not just literacy), whereas Pakistan is a very poor country with a large illiterate population and a very very small affluent and rent-seeking upper class.









Easier said than done. What does that even mean? What's the correct approach? Let's assume magically we get amazing R&D capacity for the sake of argument. What happens next?




Again this would work for a country that had at least SOME reverse brain drain too..look at India...good example is China. These countries have sustainable generation of talent of which a lot of goes abroad. With Pakistan absolutely NO ONE is coming back. EVERYTHING is going out. The quality of teaching is constantly going down and thus the quality of talent is also going down - since no one is coming back so that they can be poorer and be harassed for being competent. The way things are going, very quickly Pakistan will run out of talent to export.

This is what I see very closely being involved in academics.




Yes that's a possibility. But here is where our absolutely nonexistent corporate law enforcement, corruption, rent-seeking economy that invests in real-estate only, and 0 access to capital will come in to smother any possibility of a business growing (except maybe fintech that don't need capital). I would like to believe what you say and it would make me happier but unfortunately, I have seen the opposite of that happening.



And this is what I am on about really. THAT is the key. And what does that mean? Well you need:
1. A functioning judicial system that can deal with corporate cases QUICKLY
2. Policies that discourage rent-seeking behavior like our people's and state's obsession with real estate



I think you're comparing Pakistan with the wrong countries. ZAB absolutely wrecked our industrial base. We have no leg to stand on. We need legs first.

I have views which likely will drag this discussion further, but you do raise important points and I appreciate your time in sharing them with me.

OK, on a crux, lets for a millisecond imagine, something could be done in the field of R&D.

Please for a moment forget the naysayers, the bad experiences, the monotony that is bad news about Pakistani this and that lol

Let's say we were to take a step forward in the direction of R&D, (forget that it will fail or produce no results)
What steps, in your opinion we should or could take that will get us going into the right direction.
A positive answer will be appreciated a million, billion trillion times

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

PHDs main role is to do research , investigation into new Processes , Techniques , Never been done before segment. The purpose of their investigation is to give their country an advantage to build something before rest of world so they can Patent The Technology Globally

• Pakistani Companies presently are not in a leadership position globally , generally happy with using what is already in market (Off The Shelf)

Research and Development is not a Gamble , for a Corporations they need to invest certain % from their yearly budget to remain competitive


Scenario:
If Steeles Mills in Karachi was functional , and it being a State Asset , a functional company which is functioning normally would hire certain % workers to R&D new techniques to give Steeles Mills competitive advantage in manufacturing

• They would hire researchers to help reduce pollution at plant
• They would hire researchers to develop new products with the existing Technology
• They would hire researchers to examine technology in market to help recommend and implement such technology in company.
• May be the R&D would expand to understand properties of matter and research studies publish in international journals

May be there would be Government Grant to research new metal combinations for Military purpose
For that Government would set aside certain Million Dollars worth of money for research

The money is distributed to University Networks which all collaborate on the research creating Junior Associates would do their thesis around successful ideas.

In a ideal world , where people don't say "Khata hai to Lagata bhi hai"


Strong Corporations ---> For Profit ---> 15% of Profits spend on PHDs and Research

 

[peagle]

Another aspect is that no other threat to life exists - for the most part if it wasn’t for terrorism and diseases Pakistanis will not die of hunger. Food is abundant despite the struggles of many poor who at some point or another will be fed. The mindset to innovate comes from a lack of any movement up Maslows pyramid(my favorite example). So the desires keep oscillating even up to the elite on food, shelter and sex to only climb up that pyramid in certain cases.

Are you of the opinion that Maslow is absent in Pakistan?
I don't think he needs a visa to visit any longer, his soul is free to roam lol

But, I do get our point, at some level I can see how it can be applied with regards to Pakistani people. But, I think we are in extreme danger of underestimating ourselves. It has to be recognised that despite the hurdles, the problems and lack of support relative to others, we have come far. It is another matter that we could have gone further.
Rest assured, we still can, and we shall go further lol