IN A MANNER of speaking, it could be said that the role of advocacy rightfully belongs to the private sector, and the role of the government is to listen to the private sector. With that differentiation of roles, it would no longer happen that the government would not listen to itself as it talks to itself.
Under that scenario, the worst thing that the government could do is not to listen to the private sector, in which case the private sector would have no choice except to deploy the technologies on their own, without the support of the government. If and when that differentiation of roles is put into place, there would in effect be a system of checks and balances, since the government could still regulate the deployment of technologies, even if it does nothing to deploy these.
Nowhere does it say in the functions of the Department of Science & Technology (DOST) that it is also responsible for harnessing and managing foreign technologies for domestic use. It seems very clear in the DOST publications that its function is to promote the development of indigenous technologies and to undertake the development of these technologies to commercial stage.
Although DOST used to have Science Attaches abroad, it seems that there are none now, a clear sign that there is no system now to harness foreign technologies for domestic use. I am aware that there is still a Balik-Scientist Program to bring in scientists of Filipino descent, but that is really not enough.
Even if the DOST no longer has Science Attaches assigned abroad, the government could still monitor and harness foreign technologies by way of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), through its diplomats and consuls who are assigned abroad.
As a matter of fact, this function could also be done by the Trade Attaches of the Department of Trade & Industry (DTI) who are also assigned abroad. In reality, technology transfer aided by foreign economic intelligence is part of the functions of our diplomatic and consular missions abroad, as stipulated in the Foreign Service Act of 1991. It is very clear in that Act how and why economic diplomacy should be done, technology transfer being part of it.
In this time and age of the internet, there is no longer an excuse not to be able to monitor and harness technologies from abroad that could be used here. In reality, those who are monitoring these technologies need not be based abroad, because they could actually be based here and still be able to do the same thing.
In theory, the development and deployment of foreign technologies are driven by the forces of the market, and in reality, many of these technologies would arrive in our shores as the local demand for these would emerge. As a matter of fact, many of the owners of these technologies would actually set up their own offices or would appoint their own local representatives. All we need to do is to talk to them here./PN
