Borderless

bankngam

 

Science Park as quantum jump’s instrument of Thailand’s economy

 

-Introduction-

Since 1990-1995, Thailand duplicates Science Park’s concept and creates alliance network among University which concern about bridging between academic research and industrial sectors as relationship of “Stanford and Silicon Valley” and others. Unfortunately, economics crisis in 1997 cause’s financial scarcity and pushes science and technology development as sun set policy. However King Mongkut University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT) success in surviving and jumping across barrier such as lack of funding problem1.

 

Now, KMUTT’s success causes inspiration and new science park through regional University without character centralization or management domination. But, “How can others science park can create their own character and goal?” is the core question of policy maker as same as this paper. So, this paper try hard to synthesis 3 factors as answer’s ingredient [of above question]. Firstly, direction of Thai regional development plans. Secondly, case study about science park establishing and operating. Finally, additional perspective of economist’s glasses.

-Model / Conceptual Framework-

 

Figure 1: Triple Helix model, source: writer

 

 

 

This paper base on tri-partiate or triple helix model that has three major parties which include policy-maker as implementer [supply side], firm as end user of science and technology [demand side], and university as bridge of knowledge or knowledge allocator. Under this model, university is final jigsaw of success in matching process between demand and supply of science and technology development.

 

In this frame, supplier’s goal and demand’s need might not perfect correspond all the time. University in status of knowledge allocator has to unite them with variety of instrument and method. For examples, tailor made supplier’s policy like local demand’s requirement. But, sometime, university uses “supplies create its own demand” concept. I mean, in many case, end user don’t know about science and technology enough to voice or detect exactly point of willingness so university has to guide, build and launch supply side policy for local industry to help them [without interruption or domination].

 

The park definition is extended more than space or facility. This paper judge science park as function or I can say: “Science Park is mechanism”

 

 

 

-Supply side driven policy2-

 

As I told you before, on the one hand, regional science parks don’t have to be synchronized to the same characters and goals. On the other hand, each science parks has to create horizontal linkage together in some way. Although, both hands, may be depended on regional development plan in general scope, destination [and have freedom to choose suitable methods simultaneously].

 

Regional development plan is can be separated in 5 significant parts.

(1) Spatial base development

 

Core idea about this kind of plan is “South-East Asia’s spatial connected creation” such as… East-West and North-South economic corridor. figure 1 shed obvious path of economic achievement and linkage between Thailand and another South-East Asia countries. This plan emits positive externalities in many points: logistic improvement from western of Lao, Vietnam and Cambodia to eastern of Burma. Moreover, In North-South direction, China Vietnam and Lao can drive their goods to Thai Bay in shortly distance. More comfortably logistic system means chance of increasing in industrial installing at internal area, employment, and income redistribution and, most important, alliance between intra-regional firms.

 

However, all above descriptions are just only infrastructure (hard) investment. These plan expand its mention to soft investment too, such as, local services investment, upper and lower steam of logistics services given sustainability of local resources, for examples, supporting of “water grid” development and sparing source of water for local communities, protect balance ecological system and using fiscal instrument for efficiently fine tune & allocate resources between agricultural sector and industrial sector.

(2) Northern strategic development

 

Core values of northern of Thailand are agriculture and handicraft base economy. So, strategic development that policy-maker designed for northern area is systematic raise efficiency and add value into local agricultural goods and services such as supporting grain transmuted process development in lower-northern area or create package of R&D cluster, industrial area and innovation investment.

 

These plan not only reform about macro plan such as infrastructure and renovation of border city investment but also interest in human resources investment, match able system of management, self-social security and self-social protection, finally, conservative-balance using natural resources with respect to natural disaster watch.

 

Flagship projects: Agricultural value chain and value added development within organic planting, developing value creation of handicraft and linking its by product to OTOP Village project, namely, “Craft City”, Driving Cheing Mai as the centre of international connection especially for Maekhong sub-region, Synergy all of local knowledge and intellectual such as Lanna’s culture, last but not least, Approving water resources management.

 

(3) North-Eastern strategic development

 

These part of Thailand has 4 pillars of economic strength: large area where can economically farm energy plants such as sugar cane or cassava, potential area for ethanol industry because of location [have a lot of energy plants farming], main channel of commercial and traveling industry of Indo-China and plentifully historical district in central area of the region.

 

Strategic development of this region: emerge and advance competitiveness of economy cause wage gap divergence across region then labor flow out is broken and some of them mobilize back to mother land [in the mean time, I guess, unofficially migration has to be involved too], Clustering vary to variety of goods and services such as i) industrial clustering, ii) fabrics, textile and clothes clustering, iii) alternative energy and food clustering etc., Story or history base traveling.

 

Furthermore, human resources speculation, social interaction and empowerment such as community enterprise supporting, well being and local welfare provision, land reforming and elaborately agricultural economy impulsion, at last, resources recovery and protection are also included in this regional planning.

 

Flagship projects: local rice exporting, promote mukdaharn as the gate to Indo-China, promote Khom culture base traveling, expand contract farming and zoning of energy farming for ethanol industry, faraway education for local student… etc.

 

(4) Central Plain strategic development

 

Characters of this region are combination of high capital intensive industry [except "Ready to cook, Ready to eat" food industry], logistic center, eventually heart of scholar, researcher and knowledge pumping of the state.

 

Strategic development of this region: i) originate base sector of current economy such as health services, automobile, electronics hardware and its relative instruments, food and agricultural transfigure industry, and logistics amelioration. ii) Amplify quality and quantity of education sector in vacation [for directly inject to industrial sector], and specific topic such as researcher of science and technology institution. iii) Recover environment as all region have to do. iv) Integrate inter-region for better economic performance and elaborate sub-urban area concurrently.

 

Flagship projects: develop concentrate agriculture at upper area of the plain; develop traveling area at western beach line (Royal Coast) and aware erosion problem, etc.

(5) Southern strategic development

 

Natural capitals of this region are complete system of rubber and palm tree field, marine transformation process, centre of marine sightseeing, land-bridge between Andaman and Thai Bay, and significant area of gas and iron & steel industry.

 

Strategic development of southern part can be separated to 5 bases: i) continuously pull regional productivity up given agricultural industry and traveling campaign, ii) enlarge regional economic, income [and employment] distribution center such as linkage industrial and service of economic corridor and Songklar-Stool land-bridge, iii) develop humans and social [as combination of humans] for better self-guard and higher productivity especially for community economy, iv) like all regions, recover natural resources of region.

 

Flagship projects: push Songklar to the rubber tree transforming and Surathanee as palm farming center of South-East Asia, develop service cluster for supporting uncountable traveler number in near future, revive rice farming and economic food transmuting industry specifically about “Haral food”, restore poverty of Yala-Naratiwas-Patanee provinces.

 

In summation, all regions have its own natural characters, appropriate policy and, most significantly, unique occupant’s needs. From above content, science park should be tailor designed [not only macro relationship between parties in tri-partiate model but also micro management style too] by dialogue of all stakeholder in its regions.

-Case study-

Formation of Science Park is not unique. In fact, each country has own style of management, function and linkage with stakeholders given different formation. hence, Thai science park should be designed its components with foreign practice which this paper review from 8 countries [that is Singapore, England, Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, Germany, Poland, Hungary] but select only one country to explain in this section3.

Let’s begin with nearest country among this review, namely, Singapore. In my opinion, Singapore is only one of rarely country that government [, Economic Development Board] is initiate of science park4. The park was established after decreasing in electronics export and Foreign Direct Investment uninterruptedly flow out to lower wage countries [as healthy stress] so, Singapore change direction of industrial from capital-intensive to knowledge intensive economy.

 

Some of policy-maker skips Singapore out of imitation because Singapore has significantly differentiation relative with Thailand such as political stability, human resources scarcity, geography and etc. However, in my opinion, Singaporean Science Park is reasonably worth enough to observe since:

 

i) Although, Singapore use external human resources importing approach lead to science park formation but Thai want to use internal human resources creation approach. However, both methods base on the same important question “How to hold target human resources as much as “critical mass level” need and as long as to have an impact?” I believe, Singapore has good answer of this question.

 

ii) In contrast of ordinary perception, “Singapore just buy good researcher” is absolutely wrong. From empirical evidence, Singapore try to fund for graduate student, then, fair scholarship will eventually reduce the country’s dependence on foreign scientists. Moreover, Minister of Education announce to reform country’s primary and secondary curriculum simultaneously.

 

iii) Singapore can teach us too far about by-product of science park such as rebirth of sun set industry by technology injection, well-developed health care system and up surge in multinational pharmaceutical companies’ investment. All of these success are derivative of Nation Biomedical Science Strategy (2000), which pump an estimated 2 billion over the next 5 years into new institutes [such as, Genome Institute of Singapore, Bioinformatics Institute, Agency for Science Technology and Research, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Bio-processing Technology Centre, Institute of Bioengineering, etc.]

 

Besides, the figure 2 below shows you about interviewing of foreign scientists in Singapore. Information about incentive and benefits combination that Singapore offers to them is wealthy fact as benchmark of Thai Science Park in near future.

 

Figure 2: Interviewing box of foreign researchers who were mobilized to work in Singapore

 

 

 

Source: Dennis Normile. Can Money turn Singapore into a Biotech Juggernaut?, Science

-Economist’s frame about science park-

 

In reality, I want to choose this section as a first section for explain about correlation between science park and economics growth. However, from skimming some economic study, this relationship is not consisting for all case of Science Park. More terribly, in United Kingdom case, lower-than-to-be-expected levels of employment, innovation, new start-up formation and relations with university were suspected by economists (Doreen, Paul and David, 1994). Hit the point, this part is written as warn voice… “Like all ordinary mechanism and policy instrument science park can explode negative externality as much as positives if we use its function in wrong way”.

 

Firstly, even though, end users of Science Park are firm or some special individual case but optimal goal of benevolent government and [should] also Science Park is “Social Welfare”. So, aggregate economics growth or exporting value is less significant than income, employment and safety-net redistribution from Science Park. If we do not strongly concern this ideal, at the end, Thai has high chance to be damaged by our policies again and again.

 

Secondly, all incentives and fiscal spending for Science Park are supported by taxation. So, stakeholder especially for policy-maker should concern about equity of expenditure, say, using public money for narrow private sector has to be created some condition to regulate about fair return to social sector such as highly progressive rate taxation from company which gets subsidy [both, cash or non-pecuniary] from science park except the company reinvest in research and development given government is shareholder of the right of innovation.

 

Thirdly, each regional science park should has free room for competitive together and share resources at the same time. Because, perfect dependency is as worse off as perfect competition field without linkage [can cause resources wasting].

 

-Conclusion-

These model just kicking-off idea about science park analysis’s ingredient: Framework, Supply side policy, Demand side need and some caution from economics perspective; however, next paper should focus on potential and fitting function of university [as knowledge of science and technology bridge]. Moreover, micro topic such as management approach (should centralized or decentralized?) and etc. Finally, we have to get real Thai science park organization’s style.