Deployment of Knowledge and Science Between Europe and Southeast Asia
By Leo Schmit
The themes of these forums and meetings are derived from the context of the "New Asia
Strategy" of the European Union (EU), especially the relationship of the EU with the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). At the outset, official attention for areas
outside the scope of trade and security relationships was small. Gradually the qualitative
aspects of this relationship have gained in importance. The themes range from understanding
values, religion, regional cooperation, political decision making, and the acquisition of science
and technology to interuniversity relationships and university-company relationships between
the two regions.
The IIAS and Leiden University have been deeply involved in this endeavour: they were in
the forefront in providing advisory services to the Asia Directorate of the European
Commission DG I (External Economic Relations) to assist in the organization of the Forum
in Venice in January 1996 (IIASN7); then by organizing on behalf of the Asia Committee of
the European Science Foundation, a workshop on Education and Culture at the Engelberg
Forum in March 1996 (IIASN8); most recently they have done their bit by making a
contribution to the workshop on Southeast Asia at the forum on interuniversity relationships
at the European Patents Office at Munich in June.
Interuniversity relationships
The forum on interuniversity relationships and university-company relationships between
Europe and Asia on 3-5 June was organized by Prometheus Europe and held as mentioned
above in Munich.
The participants were given an overview of the latest initiatives taken by the EC DGI Asia
Directorate and they learned from the experiences of the managers of ongoing programmes
between European and Asian partners. It also was a good opportunity to reflect on the future
of academic partnerships and their links with business (see box).
Issues on the table included:
- How to develop strategies for bilateral and regional academic/business partnerships in
the light of global commercial, political, and cultural dynamics?
- How to reach agreement about research priorities and the selection of course modules,
methodologies, and operational practices to ensure their relevance to the different educational
and research endowments in Asia and Europe?
- How to develop meaningful and viable networks based on personal relationships and
to the mutual benefit of the partners?
- How to avoid a brain drain?
There is no disagreement that priorities in interuniversity programmes should be defined
bearing the institutional capacities and deficiencies of the partners involved in mind. Yet,
when donor funds are involved, priorities tend to be dictated by the tenets of development-
related research often with disregard to the specific requirements of Asian partner institutions
related to Asia's increasing involvement in world trade and politics and the concomitant
educational and research needs in the region. European institutions tend to offer standard,
medium, and long-term course programmes and almost all of them have problems in meeting
any demand which lies beyond the scope of their areas of specialization. All too often it
happens that only a limited number of university staff can be effectively deployed for
implementation of programme activities.
Procedural deficiencies which hamper the implementation of cooperation programmes were
discussed at great length during the forum: visa application problems; competency for
supervision; research and travel permission; and the circumscribed opportunities for the
placement of trainees and staff. Asian participants acknowledged the need for improvement
in these areas. They also expressed their concern about the apparent lack of respect shown by
their European partners for the mandates which most Asian institutions for higher education
are working under in view of their commitments to issues defined in national and regional
medium-term plans and their role as policy advisors. This criticism is levelled particularly at
European institutions which insist on cooperation in development-related or area-specific
research and are unwilling or unable to cater to universal science and knowledge requirements
because of the supposed uniqueness of Asia.
Potential partners are also asked to take more notice of the linking and matching schemes
which are undertaken at present between institutes of higher education in Asia and Asian and
foreign companies working through networks across national borders. Another request
submitted by Asian institutions is to have access to the vast bulk of historical source materials
and collections of which Europeans are the guardians. For these institutions, this would
establish an essential foundation of knowledge at a moment when these resources risk being
passed over through the dynamics of rapid transition. Everybody accepts the premise that a
mature partnership implies equality and mutual benefit. Yet a significant obstacle, apart from
overcoming differences in enumeration, still exists in the reluctance among European
institutions to accept parity of competence among Asian professors and researchers. One
striking example of this attitude was given by a statement concerning the acceptability of
supervision by professors from Asia of European doctoral or post-doctoral students engaged
in "Asia-specific" topics.
Today networking and building consortia of partners is the way to go about creating a new
dynamic in relationships between Europe and Asia. The problem is to make a distinction
between a network and a directory. Hundreds of institutes and many thousands of researchers
and professionals are seeking involvement in relationships between the two regions. Some
form or another of concentration and clustering of activities is required, probably assigning
a pivotal role to selected core institutions. The introduction of more flexible modes of staff
deployment and more accurate assessments of the costs and benefits involved is also a
must.
One can argue that networks should be of a selective nature, perhaps even taking the form of
exclusive functional groupings or, contrariwise, shifting coalitions focused on specific issues.
Other networks may be based on sharing collections or laboratories and/or joint management
of regional educational and training facilities. As a whole these networks should constitute
support infrastructures to be tapped by the partners according to the principle of "pick and
choose".
In brief there are three aspects of relevance: partnerships concerned with Europe and Asia
coping with global changes and domestic adjustments; partnerships concerned with ownership
by providing access to universal knowledge taking into account its applicability on the spot;
partnerships concerned with concentration of their endeavours by forming temporary strategic
alliances rather than fixing relationships in the long term.
Southeast Asia
These foregoing points refer to the situation in Southeast Asia which is rapidly changing in
the context of regional approaches such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and the global framework
constituted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the UN institutions. Southeast Asian
nations are keen to diversify their markets with respect to Europe and are upgrading the
quality of their products to satisfy the taste of middle-class consumers in the latter region. By
analogy there will also be a need for diversification in terms of the sources of knowledge in
favour of Europe.
The urgent need to establish sound institutions and reform regulatory frameworks to
accommodate the process of rapid transition and growth carries within it the germs of an
enormous potential for mounting European involvement. Given the relatively high transaction
costs involved in partnerships between regions as diverse as Europe and Southeast Asia,
concentration of the effort and targeting of activities to high levels of competence with
methodologies and operational modules seems to be the wisest way to go about this.
Most Southeast Asian nations now have a 'critical mass' of people with international levels
of scientific qualifications ready for deployment both at the domestic and the regional level.
In June 1995 an ASEAN university network was established for that very purpose. Some sort
of alignment from European university networks or the European Science Foundation may be
helpful in the setting up of partnerships. To be relevant these have to be drawn up by people
familiar with the priority areas in regional cooperation and the regional plans of action
published by the ASEAN Secretariat at Jakarta.
Strategic reflection
If the backgrounds of the participants in the forums on Europe-Asia relationships are added
up and the range of interests which are potentially of mutual benefit are recognized, it is
tempting to believe that such a massive deployment of good intentions will be sufficient to
gain momentum of its own.
Before this is the case, strategies must be developed and actions undertaken. The notion of
strategy is often confused with action or at best understood as finding solutions to operational
problems. What needs to be done is the adoption of new rules and parameters for mutual
engagement, seizing new opportunities and positions, and defining the long-term objectives
to be achieved. Or better, the other way around, but as long as these objectives remain
unknown achieving a sense of parity in partnerships is a good way to start.
In tackling the subject of strategy, the university community should take a closer look at the
various business strategies that are being used by European companies with a long-term
interest in Asia. One very good example is the set of four dimensions of strategy defined by
Philippe Lasserre and Hellmut Schütte (Strategies for Asia-Pacific, MacMillan
Business, London: 1995): ambition, means, investments, and organisation with a breakdown
of each category into specific elements. Apart from helping academic managers to make an
assessment of the opportunities such company strategies generate for university-company
relationships, and as there is already a plethora of them, these strategies can also be adapted
to the academic community.
Talking about strategies is useless unless the strategies of other players in the field are also
considered, particularly the global players. Given the universality of knowledge and science,
European players will have to define the specific advantages of their involvement in this
region, which are numerous, in the light of the policy environment, the trade dynamics, and
the concomitant knowledge requirements sketched above. Targeting partnerships at high levels
of competence is required, a process in which a focus is placed on direct access to sources
of knowledge and historical collections, formation of functional networks and establishment
of interdisciplinary technical support infrastructures.
The opportunities for the involvement of academics are plentiful. But the academic
community will first have to swallow some pride and pay more attention to the priorities set
by Asian partners. They will have to develop more empathy with their colleagues working in
their specific policy and business environments. There can be no parity in the deployment of
knowledge and science between Europe and Asia as long as the requirement of open access
to the historical and contemporary sources of knowledge is not fulfilled.
- the initiatives taken by the European Commission, DG I External Economic Relations,
Asia Directorate to establish European Studies programmes in Thailand and the Philippines,
with similar initiatives planned for China and India
- the cooperation between German and Chinese institutes of higher technical education
linked to the investment programme of Volkswagen in Shanghai
- the ESA-UNET, European Southeast Asian University Network which is primarily active in the field of environmental technology
- the Austria-ASEA-UNINET programme of the University of Insbrück with universities from Thailand in the field of science (chemistry) coordinating a graduate scholarship programme for Thai and Vietnamese students and researchers in Austrian universities
- the EC programme for the placement of 675 Asian and 325 European junior executive managers in companies from both regions (with a contribution from the AHOLD Company in its consortium with other Dutch companies in this programme)
- the European Science Foundation Committee for Advanced Asian Studies viewpoints on the deployment of Asian Studies between Europe and Asia
- the official Indonesian presentation of research and education priorities in the light of the dynamics in Asia
- the official Thai programme to combat brain drain and facilitate the return of Thai academics working in Europe to Thailand
- the official German viewpoints on the statement of the Asia-Europe Meeting with regard to strengthening academic and cultural commitments between Europe and Asia