This article is the third in a series looking at the role and impact on national development of our universities in the areas of science, engineering and technology. In this one, the focus is on the need for expanding and deepening the research infrastructure and making it more responsive to developmental needs.
In teaching and research universities, faculty are required to engage in research. Promotion and indeed contract renewal/tenure demand it. While the pursuit of doctorates and research-based master's degrees have intrinsic value, research staff and facilities are very expensive and hence there must be some direction and priority assigned if the country is to reap the anticipated and necessary benefits from this expenditure. The research, then, should be relevant to the needs of the country and must have added value.
The Faculty of Agriculture at the UWI did not survive as a separate entity as its research had minimal impact on the agricultural production (what's left of it) in T&T. Many recall with nostalgia and great sadness that its predecessor was regarded as the premier agricultural research institution in the world.
The T&T academic staff, in the main, are well-qualified and competent. The record would indicate that those who go elsewhere do quite well. This then points to systemic problems here. The research infrastructure needs a serious revision if this is to be rectified.
Absolutely essential to the research venture is funding. It has become part of the national culture to throw money at the problem and expect it to be solved. It would appear that short-term memories and an inability or unwillingness to learn are also part of the national psyche. It is therefore essential that the approach taken to funding research be different. The fund must be subjected to rigorous monitoring and evaluation, preferably by an independent authority, if value for money is to be obtained.
Research is most effective and productive when done in teams. Building the critical mass to produce teams requires time and sustained effort. In universities this happens when a faculty member, who is an active researcher, develops a team of colleagues and graduate students.
Such a team is normally based in or around a lab and would be in a position to reach out to industry and government to engage in advising and producing solutions to developmental problems and issues, and creating new potential products and services.Successful universities ensure that such research infrastructure is supported through succession planning, staff hiring and funding or access to it. A casual glance at this, at both UWI and UTT, would make clear how far along the road we need to travel.
At UWI, there have been several quite active and productive research groupings that have disappeared when the lead faculty retired or resigned. One acknowledges that new areas may emerge, like nanotechnology for instance, and hence new facilities and staff need be developed. But this does not mean that the existing ones disappear. Rather, they evolve and hence the existing researchers update and upgrade themselves to be current.
UTT was set up with the intent of producing commercially viable research output as it was perceived by all and sundry that UWI was not fulfilling its potential. Its cost to the treasury was and continues to be significant. The intention is that it should be a driver or catalyst, at least, of economic diversification through innovation and entrepreneurship. Unless it is entrepreneurship of the retail type that is envisaged, then a robust research infrastructure must be developed.
Further the National Innovation System that is being envisaged would only impact if, in addition to the venture capital and business incubation elements, emphasis is placed on research in science, engineering and technology as it is the enabler of innovation and entrepreneurship.