The Annual Science and Technology in Society forum ― STS forum ― in Kyoto, Japan, founded by former Japanese Finance and Science & Technology Policy Minister Mr. Koji Omi along with an A list of Japanese scientists like Dr. Kiyoshi Kurokawa, who won the AAAS Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award, and Dr. Hiroshi Komiyama, former President of Tokyo University, has become the center-piece of science and technology fora, broadly along the lines of Davos events. Chatham House rules apply in the STS forum, and therefore officials, company executives and academics speak freely and frankly, without risk of being mis-quoted or even quoted. Mr. Omi is among the most passionate non-scientists about science and technology, who even utilized his speech at the Annual Meeting of the World Bank and IMF in 2007 to call on all governments to dedicate resources for science and technology and for collaborative research:
Mr. Omi stated: “Innovation in science and technology will enhance our efforts in addressing important challenges such as environment and infectious diseases. Joint research between developed and developing countries and capacity building of developing countries will make a crucial long-term contribution to the prosperity of humankind. I am convinced that such an approach will provide a “win-win” solution to both developed and developing countries. For this purpose, it may be worthwhile to direct a portion of official development aid (ODA) to co-operation in research activity and capacity building in the science and technology area.”
In the late 1980s, I had served as Assistant Director of Harvard University’s international health research commission that first documented worldwide efforts at R&D against then-neglected diseases such as Tuberculosis, Malaria, HIV/AIDS. Our Report was presented at a Nobel Conference in Stockholm. A few years later, the Global Fund on AIDS, TB and Malaria was established with leadership by Japan through the G7 meeting in Okinawa. Decades later, Japan still takes a leadership position on health and has stressed health a great deal in the G7 communique of the Ise-Shima meeting 2016.
Meanwhile, of course, the G7’s GDP relative to the rest of the world has sharply declined as has its overall influence.
Japan’s stress on health is natural since Japan has had universal health coverage since 1961. However, Japan’s population is only about 10% that of India’s and so countries like India will have to take multiple innovative approaches to enabling universal health coverage. The STS forum, by focusing on innovation, including much-needed enhancements in diagnostics and other devices, can tangibly support those essential innovations.
Similarly, the STS forum, being a Japanese initiative, generally attracts participants from Japan’s sphere of influence. Until recently the second-largest economy in the world, after rising from the ashes of World War II, Japan has lost momentum since 1989, when a real-estate and stock “bubble” burst, and vigorous efforts to invigorate and revitalize the economy along with its partners around the world are being effected. Needless to say, the gaping chasm between the innovation culture of Silicon Valley where small and medium companies are usually the fastest-growing, and sweat equity is commonplace, compared to the staid historical company culture of Japan that has stressed support for the legendary Japan, Inc., or buttressing the largest companies, has not been an equally successful strategy. The recently sale of storied Japanese company Sharp to Hon Hai/Foxconn Technology Group of Taiwan is a case in point.
Beyond fascinating presentations on cutting-edge issues in Science and Technology, the STS forum provides for a meeting point between scientists, governmental scientific policy makers, and company executives. But the STS forum can conceivably do more, including providing a base or basis for funding promising technologies and scientific discoveries, and indeed providing operations research support.
The Relative Decline of Multilaterals and the Essentiality of New Trustworthy Entities
The relative decline of multilaterals has meant that there is pressing need for trustworthy entities that can give unvarnished, cutting-edge analysis and assessments on the prospects of various technologies. While consulting companies produce lengthy, glossy reports, their reliance on specific companies for their existence, means that their analysis can suffer from “selection bias.”
For example, the iPS technology has generated much excitement and enthusiasm including a Nobel prize for its core innovator Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, but it is still unclear how long the gestation period might be or how cost-effective its deployment for diverse needs. Similarly, the productivity of public-private ventures has been called into question, given over 20 years of experience, in for instance the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, the Medicines for Malaria Venture, and the Global Alliance on TB Drugs R&D. Before the era of public private NPO/NGO partnerships, there was the work of Dr. Satoshi Omura at the Kitasato Institute on the discovery of Ivermectin, that was commercialized by Merck and later offered free of charge (along with a corporate tax-deduction) to governments organizing public health campaigns against onchocerciasis. On the relative lack of similar examples, some have wondered if the molecules taken from industry “cold storage shelves” by NPO/NGO public private partnerships might in fact be genuine discards with little or limited potential. Again, STS forum might initiate steps for effective support for all entities, both public and indeed public-private NGOs/NPOs, that receive public money. That is particularly so because Science and Technology has become the core of new industry worldwide.