ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Make Science Really International

Internationalize science? Isn't it a!lready international? Not at all. Countries representing only one-quarter of the world's population produce 95 percent of the new science, while the remaining three-quarters contribute only 5 percent. We are, in effect, leaving three-quarters of human brain power unused. Science would progress much faster were this not so. Given the intimate connecbetween science, technology, production and standard of living, a universalization of science would also alleviat

Michael Moravcsik
Internationalize science? Isn't it a!lready international?

Not at all. Countries representing only one-quarter of the world's population produce 95 percent of the new science, while the remaining three-quarters contribute only 5 percent. We are, in effect, leaving three-quarters of human brain power unused. Science would progress much faster were this not so. Given the intimate connecbetween science, technology, production and standard of living, a universalization of science would also alleviate many of the world's problems.

It has been said that the Third World cannot afford to evolve its own science. Yet money is not the main problem. Currently, developing countries spend about $1 billion a year (hardly a negligible sum), which is only .1 percent of their gross national products. Such an outlay hardly makes an impact on their spending in other areas.

The real problem is people. The establishment of a large, well-educated cadre of scientists with a tradition...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?
ADVERTISEMENT