In some developing countries, the money is available but it is NOT properly utilized. Allocation of financial resources, to research & development, is a governmental decision in these countries. This decision is not forthcoming; that is why there is a research budget in Weizmann Institute of Science which is more than the research budgets of all the Arabic universities (from the Gulf to Morocco) combined together.

Assuming that our governments have become wiser & they supported the universities, the academic circles have to be engaged more in applied research than in basic research. Most of the research which comes out of universities in the developing countries does not bring advantage to the society (it only serves the researchers themselves in terms of getting a degree or a promotion).

Assuming also that more emphasis has become placed on applied research, the mentalities which exist in the very academic circles need an overall change. You will find some academics trying to have control on who is to be engaged in research & who is to be isolated because the plan is to move some up the ladder & to prevent some from any progress. There is a "polluted" environment for research in the developing countries and this requires rectification.

Thanking you Dr. Ra'ed (Moh'd Taisir) Masa'deh for your excellent question.

In some developing countries, the money is available but it is NOT properly utilized. Allocation of financial resources, to research & development, is a governmental decision in these countries. This decision is not forthcoming; that is why there is a research budget in Weizmann Institute of Science which is more than the research budgets of all the Arabic universities (from the Gulf to Morocco) combined together.

Assuming that our governments have become wiser & they supported the universities, the academic circles have to be engaged more in applied research than in basic research. Most of the research which comes out of universities in the developing countries does not bring advantage to the society (it only serves the researchers themselves in terms of getting a degree or a promotion).

Assuming also that more emphasis has become placed on applied research, the mentalities which exist in the very academic circles need an overall change. You will find some academics trying to have control on who is to be engaged in research & who is to be isolated because the plan is to move some up the ladder & to prevent some from any progress. There is a "polluted" environment for research in the developing countries and this requires rectification.

Thanking you Dr. Ra'ed (Moh'd Taisir) Masa'deh for your excellent question.

Dr. Nizar, I totally agree and thank you for your great realistic answer.

Although we can list a multitude of reasons why research output in developing countries lag those of developed countries, we can condense all of those into three main reasons:

1. there is simply much more funding devoted to research in developed countries than in developing countries. research is an expensive enterprise. the kind of basic and applied research required to advance knowledge in the modern era requires substantial investments in research and development infrastructure in universities and research institutes. in developed countries, this responsibility is shared jointly by both governments and industry. in developing countries, industry is not yet at the level where they can play a substantial role and governments are cash-strapped, with many competing priorities. in this light, It is unsurprising that research in developing countries will lag behind.

2. the skills base in developing countries is shallow and not well developed. making advances in knowledge and pushing the boundaries of technology require researchers who possess cutting-edge skills and expertise. developing countries simply don't have enough of such people.

3. the management and administration of research and research related activities in developing countries is poor. government agencies and institutions tasked with the management and administration of research and development are often mired in bureaucratic red-tape, nepotism and maladministration. developed countries also have their share of this but it is less of a problem there. until developing countries can improve their institutions tasked with the management and administration of research and innovation, they will continue to lag behind.

Thank you so much for your great contributions, I agree.

No research can be carried out with out smooth funding. But economy of developing countries is volatile. Therefore, YES most of the research projects in developing countries remain at first phase and often fail due to financial crises.

Is there a link with the ability to master English, i.e. the ability to master the published international literature?

As aspect that needs to be brought out, I think, on this question is the fact that there are some extremely important research projects in many underdeveloped and developing countries that rarely are published and read as much as they should be. I find talent and innovation is everywhere, and sometimes more prominent in developing countries where the unsung heroes of science and education are laboring without the resources available elsewhere, but who still produce scholarly and research-worthy work.

Economic considerations are indeed important as a resource, but it does not necessarily dictate the talent and knowledge base of the nation. Having the funding does not guarantee the work is really worthwhile. In the US we see so much biased, vested interest-financed research that is meaningless in terms of expanding the knowledge base of man. Studies that test out the effects of a medication, for instance, are actually harmful when the study is for a short duration, the sample does not represent the real world end users, long-term side/interaction effects are not revealed, and the schemata is designed for short-term management of disease. In such cases, the money going to science is not a blessing to the population. Only where the researcher is neutral, unbiased, uninfluenced by the Zeigeist of the times, and has no obvious or hidden financial interest in the outcome will we see true knowledge evolve. Likewise, when the population being tested is real world and looked at in the long-term will see outcomes that are meaningful and research worthy.

But the larger point is that throughout humanity, talent is everywhere, smart people earnest in relieving the ills and challenges of mankind, and when circumstances are serendipitous enough to bring good work and needed funding, we all benefit. My hat goes to those who produce good research wherever they are, no matter how much money is spent doing it. Money is needed, yes, but talent and hard work will always trump money any day.

One problem is of course the lack of funding. Another one is the feeling which frequently appears in the developing world that science is just a sort of "game" for "big kids" and that it is useless in economy.

Marcel raises a good point on the need for mastery of English, which has become, somewhat the global language in business and in science. Great work, wherever it is accomplished, becomes better disseminated and influential when English-speaking and non-English-speaking scientists and scholars team up together. We learn much from eachother in multilingual collaboration.

I think, in developing countries, planning and strategies are very good, but somewhere down the line, implementation takes a back stage. Reasons for that should be identified and removed.

Thank you for your valuable contributions.

Dear All,

It is important for being open for data and information as well as for the outer world however – I think – not the standard of English knowledge determines mainly the situation of science in developing countries.

Ra'ed, I've read and cited in my lectures some studies on lead toxicity from researchers at your institution. I was impressed that those studies gave us more insight into the largely ignored public health threat of lead in the environment than many of the better funded instituttions. You are to be commended for doing a great work even under often difficult circumstances. I'm forever impressed at the talent and contribution that goes on in the midst of the turmoil of our day--hoping we one day see everywhere peace and a thirst for knowledge and enlightenment so all this wonderful knowledge is put to work in relieving the ills of our fellow men and women.

Dear Sir Max, thank you for your nice words, which motivate us to do our best. Indeed, lots of difficulties are in, but we have press on our buttons and do our best. I hope so to witness the brightness of all good things.

Dera Andràs,

but they have to publish their results worldwide toget acknowledgement. So not only good science is needed, but they have to sell their work.

ََQuoting from the valuable contributions of Professor Max Stanley Chartrand (Only where the researcher is neutral, unbiased, uninfluenced by the Zeigeist of the times, and has no obvious or hidden financial interest in the outcome will we see true knowledge evolve.). I like to add this small comment: At present, there are many examples of irrational hurry, e.g. fast food which is more of a curse than a blessing on our health, fast cars which are causing many disasters, fast profits of the large "fish" in the markets leading to suffering of large portion of the population and the idea given by the Professor of studies " I think also they are fast!" done on short-term effect of a certain medication ignoring the long-term effects. I once attacked this hurriedness in front of an old friend who replied "Time is money" but my humble view is: "sometimes" it is a waste of money! . Best regards to you Prof. Chartrand.

Thank you, Dr. Matar. You are so right on all counts. Efficiencies can only be taken advantage of after the principle or construct of knowledge has been proven. Treating long term chronic disease with short-term pharmaceuticals can only spell worse problems in the long-term from two vantage points: 1) the underlying cause has been left to rage on, and 2) all syntthetic acute medicine medications are toxic to the human body, especially after years of use. Using them has trade-offs of sorts, and at best can buy time to investigate and address underlying causes. To allow them to carry on as if they are the actual answer to anything substantive is to condemn the patient to a worse fate.