Ms. Gillian Marcelle, Executive Director, University of the Virgin Islands Research and Technology Park
United
Nations
Multi-‐stakeholder
Forum
on
Science,
Technology
and
Innovation
for
the
SDGs
Convened
by
the
President
of
ECOSOC
United
Nations
Headquarters,
New
York
City,
USA
6-‐7
June
2016
Panel
Presentation
Dr.
Gillian
Marcelle,
Executive
Director
University
of
the
Virgin
Islands,
Research
and
Technology
Park
1
Session
2:
on
“Enabling
Environment
for
Science,
Technology
and
Innovation”
(6
June,
11:30
–
13:00)
1
These
remarks
are
provided
in
a
personal
capacity
and
should
not
be
regarded
as
being
formally
representative
of
the
views
of
the
UVI
RTPark
or
the
University
of
the
Virgin
Islands,
nor
constitute
an
endorsement
by
the
US
Virgin
Islands
government.
2
Good
morning
ladies
and
gentlemen.
Thank
you
you
for
the
opportunity
to
contribute
to
the
inaugural
multi-‐stakeholder
Forum
on
science
technology
and
innovation
(STI)
for
the
sustainable
development
goals
(SDGs.)
I
wish
to
thank
the
President
of
ECOSOC,
H.E.
Oh
Joon,
the
Co-‐
Chairs
of
the
Forum
H.E.
Ambassador
Macharia
Kamau
and
Dr.
Vaughan
Turekian
and
the
organizers
of
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
for
this
invitation.
My
remarks
today
will
be
organized
around
three
main
themes,
which
are
as
follows:
Key
Ideas;
Pillars
of
Change
and
Recommended
Actions.
While
I
may
not
be
able
to
cover
these
areas
in
detail
in
my
brief
opening
statement,
am
prepared
to
expand
on
these
ideas
in
the
interactive
session,
as
well
as,
in
the
written
brief
that
accompanies
the
statement.
The
brief
will
be
available
from
the
organizers
and
online
at
CrossingWorlds
blog.
(http://crossingworlds.blogspot.com)
There
is
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
we
have
reached
an
important
inflection
point
in
thinking
about
and
doing
science,
technology
and
innovation
so
that
STI
delivers
benefits
for
humanity.
The
launch
of
the
sustainable
development
goals
(SDGs)
was
also
a
watershed
moment
for
3
the
international
community,
as
the
formulation
of
that
agenda
placed
sustainability
at
the
centre
of
the
development
defining
the
global
challenge
as
the
need
to
ensure
and
promote
peace,
prosperity,
and
well-‐
being
while
preserving
the
planet.
The
promulgation
of
that
agenda
recognized
the
scourge
of
a
growing
wealth
gap
and
rising
income
inequality.
The
international
community
has
also
acknowledged
the
challenges
inherent
in
decoupling
growth
and
employment
and
the
labour-‐saving
characteristics
of
technological
change.
For
the
last
fifty
years,
when
the
international
community
has
faced
serious
challenges,
there
has
been
set
of
guiding
propositions
and
key
assumptions
about
how
we
should
frame
responses
and
act
on
these.
Arriving
at
this
point
in
the
21st
century,
having
set
the
SDGs
as
the
goals
for
2030,
what
is
clear
is
that
the
old
ways
no
longer
serve
us
well.
Therefore,
this
Forum
comes
at
a
time
when
we
need
to
disrupt
the
status
quo
in
terms
of
thinking
about
and
doing
STI
for
development.
If
we
are
to
avoid
making
the
mistakes
of
the
past
and
produce
a
virtuous
cycle
of
change,
how
we
go
about
this
is
as
important
as
what
we
do.
First
and
foremost
we
need
to
draw
on
the
resources,
creativity
and
insights
of
all
groups,
not
only
those
occupying
positions
of
privilege.
This
will
not
4
only
greatly
enhance
the
moral
authority
with
which
we
tackle
global
problems
but
is
likely
to
increase
the
likelihood
of
successfully
delivering
meaningful
and
substantial
benefits.
I.
Key
Ideas
In
the
area
of
ideas,
it
will
be
necessary
to:
1. Expand
concepts
of
the
triple
helix
to
include
the
financial
sector.
Increased
access
to
and
variety
in
sources
of
finance,
particularly
risk
finance
are
vital
ingredients.
In
STI
circles,
a
great
deal
of
attention
has
been
paid
to
understanding
the
linkages
and
relationships
between
universities,
industry
and
government,
but
insufficient
effort
and
focus
has
been
placed
on
relationships
with
providers
of
financial
capital.
In
the
developing
world,
these
folks
are
often
not
in
the
room
or
even
part
of
the
conversation.
When
introducing
considerations
of
the
financial
system
in
this
agenda,
it
is
also
important
to
be
mindful
of
recent
changes
such
as
de-‐risking
of
the
financial
system
and
its
deleterious
effects
on
regions
of
the
world,
such
as
the
island-‐states
of
the
Caribbean
region.
2. Reconceptualize
innovation
as
a
set
of
processes
aimed
at
producing
private
and
social
value
in
which
bidirectional
exchange
of
knowledge
is
key.
The
secret
sauce
of
innovative
nations,
regions,
cities,
and
even
individual
organizations
has
been
shown
to
be
the
creation
of
an
5
enabling
environment
that
allows
actors
to
generate
and
circulate
ideas
and
knowledge
and
combine
these
in
ways
that
produce
value.
The
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
can
play
an
important
role
in
setting
out
a
critical
research
program
to
deepen
understanding
of
how
these
processes
work
in
the
developing
world.
We
cannot
simply
continue
to
rely
on
out-‐dated
formulaic
prescriptions
about
the
ratio
of
R&D
to
GDP
and
hope
for
the
best.
A
much
more
theoretically
bold,
granular,
context
specific
agenda
for
STI
and
development
is
required.
3. Embrace
technology
acquisition
and
knowledge
exchange
I
would
argue
that
to
move
forward
an
important
conceptual
shift
involves
abandoning
and
tossing
into
the
garbage
heap
of
history
the
notion
and
term
“technology
transfer”.
I
say
this
in
the
strongest
terms
because
if
the
developing
world
is
to
be
an
active
agent
of
change
participating
fully
in
the
technological
and
knowledge
age,
all
actors
must
be
considered
apriori
as
sources
of
knowledge
that
produce
value.
The
term
technology
transfer
and
the
processes
associated
with
it,
is
loaded
and
implies
a
source
of
the
knowledge
in
the
global
North
and
passive
recipients
in
the
developing
world.
6
Global
warming
and
the
other
deleterious
effects
associated
with
climate
change
did
not
take
place
because
of
superior
knowledge
in
the
global
North,
so
why
should
the
world
rely
on
these
actors
to
lead
the
international
community
in
designing
solutions
for
mitigation
and
adaptation
to
climate
change.
Democratization
of
knowledge
and
truly
embracing
reciprocity
is
required.
Perhaps,
its
important
to
recognize
as
a
starting
point
that
different
cosmologies,
value
systems
and
the
economic
and
political
systems
associated
with
them
produce
varying
environmental
effects.
With
that
assumption,
it
should
become
clear
that
the
shamans,
farmers,
and
community
leaders
of
the
rural
villages
across
the
planet
may
have
more
to
teach
about
resilience
and
sustainability
than
those
of
us
sitting
in
the
global
North.
Our
current
processes
for
sharing
knowledge
and
according
value
do
not
allow
for
those
voices
to
be
heard
and
for
their
perspectives
to
be
treated
with
equal
respect.
Even
beyond
the
issue
of
ensuring
diversity
across
sources
of
knowledge,
there
is
need
for
change
even
within
the
modern
and
industrialised
world.
There
is
recognition
that
within
countries
and
across
the
globe,
we
need
to
move
towards
generation,
production
and
diffusion
of
low-‐carbon
systems.
However,
the
pace
at
which
this
transition
takes
place
is
slowed
down
because
of
political
interests.
The
world
has
to
endure
a
delay
on
receiving
the
benefit
of
positive
multipliers
because
the
power
relationships
and
structures
that
created
the
negative
effects
of
climate
change
are
so
entrenched.
In
the
7
development
agenda
under
the
banner
of
technology
transfer,
these
organizations
are
in
the
forefront
of
offering
advice
to
the
rest
of
the
world
on
how
to
manage
the
transition
to
low-‐carbon
systems.
By
denoting
the
generation
and
exchange
of
technological
solutions
-‐-‐
technology
transfer
–
we
miss
the
boat!
The
global
community
needs
to
expand
its
search
for
solutions
and
to
support
active
technology
acquisition
strategies
and
bi-‐directional
knowledge
exchange
to
diffuse
those
solutions.
This
should
be
done
in
ways
that
do
not
reinforce
the
existing
patterns
of
inequality
and
concentration
of
wealth
and
power.
Environmental
degradation
takes
place
at
a
planetary
scale.
The
effects
of
consumption
and
production
patterns
in
one
part
of
the
world
have
impacts
thousands
of
miles
away.
These
effects
are
cumulative,
system-‐
wide
and
difficult
to
change.
Designing
and
deploying
solutions
will
require
cooperation
and
collaboration
without
the
presumption
of
the
one-‐way
flow
of
technological
systems
and
knowledge
from
the
global
North
to
the
rest
of
the
world.
8
4. Recognize
that
geography
and
practice
of
innovation
and
STI
effort
have
changed
dramatically
over
the
last
two
decades.
As
show
in
Figure
1
below:
Source:
National
Science
Board
(2010)
In
addition
to
changes
taking
place
within
the
formal
and
traditional
science
system,
there
is
also
growing
recognition
of
the
importance
of
non-‐formal
ways
of
knowing
and
non-‐science
based
pathways
to
innovation,
particularly
as
this
relates
to
innovation
for
social
purposes.
5. Avoid
technological
determinism.
The
relative
poor
performance
of
the
ICT
sector
in
terms
of
co-‐creating
outcomes
of
diversity
along
lines
of
class,
race,
gender,
sexual
9
orientation
and
national
origin
should
be
a
salutary
lesson
for
the
world.
Technology
is
too
important
to
be
left
up
to
unshackled
market
forces.
It
is
important
to
imbue
values
and
principles
of
justice,
equality
and
equity
into
the
agenda
and
to
have
in
mind
a
set
of
goals
that
incorporate
an
ethical
dimension.
Without
this
the
social
and
societal
components
are
left
to
one
side.
The
ICT
sector
produced
tremendous
growth
in
wealth,
notwithstanding
the
dot.com
boom
and
bust.
However,
this
sector
has
also
allowed
a
clear
view
of
what
happens
when
only
markets
rule
and
the
rules
of
the
game
are
survival
of
the
fittest.
The
overhyped
workplace
trends
that
peaked
in
the
last
decade
have
been
shown
to
be
only
well
suited
to
a
thin
slice
of
humanity
and
reinforce
behaviours
and
personality
traits
that
do
not
serve
us
well.
We
have
to
at
least
try
to
demonstrate
that
it
is
possible
to
develop
high
growth
dynamic
tech
sectors
that
are
not
also
associated
with
racism,
sexism,
homophobia
and
online
bullying.
II.
Pillars
These
ideas
can
take
root
and
bring
about
a
virtuous
cycle
of
growth
with
equity,
improve
human
welfare
and
well
being
if
we
pay
attention
to
the
following
important
pillars:
Values
and
Principles
that
promote,
secure
and
protect
human
rights,
justice,
equality
and
equity.
Catalysts
to
lead
action
and
convenors
to
bring
stakeholders
together
to
undertake
actions
using
appropriate
mechanisms
and
processes,
at
all
levels,
including
the
multilateral.
10
Mechanisms
and
processes,
including
the
multilateral
system
and
the
United
Nations.
This
set
of
actions
will
generate
resources
and
also
define
rules
for
allocation
of
those
resources.
It
will
help
to
set
goals
that
are
on
the
one
hand
aspirational
but
also
achievable.
III.
Recommended
Actions
I
wish
to
commend
the
organizers
of
this
Panel
and
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
for
making
a
start
on
this
important
effort,
at
this
time
when
it
is
needed.
In
the
preparatory
material,
we
were
asked
to
consider
what
would
it
take
to
entice
and
enable
STI
providers
to
address
the
challenges
of
the
most
vulnerable
and
marginalized.
This
shows
that
the
TFM
has
acknowledged
that
structural
realities
and
positions
in
global
systems
matter.
Sadly,
these
factors
shape
aspirations
and
ambitions
and
can
lead
to
paralysis.
The
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
stated
that
the
international
community
should
set
itself
a
goal
for
building
an
enabling
environment
that
is
both
attractive
to
foreign
investment
and
locally
supportive
of
innovation,
adaptation
of
technology
and
dissemination
of
knowledge.
11
This
is
very
much
on
point.
I
would
like
to
extend
an
invitation
to
the
TFM
to
collaborate
with
the
UVI
Research
&
Technology
Park
(https:rtpark.uvi.edu),
a
private-‐public-‐academic
partnership,
which
has
statutory
powers
to
attract
knowledge-‐based
and
technology
intensive
businesses
to
the
US
Virgin
Islands,
and
to
use
this
facility
as
a
test
bed
in
its
efforts
to
achieve
this
goal.
The
architects
of
the
RTPark
were
bold
and
visionary.
They
had
faith
that
technology
enabled
diversification
would
provide
a
growth
impulse
for
a
small
US
Territory
in
the
Caribbean,
where
the
population
is
only
just
above
100,000
and
the
traditional
mainstays
have
been
tourism,
agriculture,
rum-‐production
and
oil
refining.
This
unique
program
of
FDI
attraction
seeks
to
harness
the
benefits
of
US
laws,
pro-‐business
regulations
and
attractive
tax
incentives
to
build
a
sector
that
would
not
naturally
be
associated
with
this
place.
In
the
last
year,
the
Board
of
Directors
approved
a
new
strategy
allowing
the
RTPark
to
focus
on
partnering
with
impact
investors.
The
US
Virgin
Islands
has
benefitted
from
considerable
technological
infrastructure
investment
(both
publicly
and
privately
financed)
with
the
result
that
on
the
North-‐Western
tip
of
St
Croix
(as
the
most
Eastern
point
of
the
United
States)
there
is
a
landing
point
for
large
capacity
sub-‐terrestrial
broadband
cables
that
connect
into
Tier
1
peering
points
for
the
Internet
backbone.
There
is
also
a
high-‐speed
12
cable
ring
across
the
entire
Territory,
owned
and
operated
by
the
Virgin
Islands
Next
Generation
Network
(VI
NGN).
The
challenge
facing
the
US
Virgin
Islands
is
common
to
many
developing
country
regions;
we
must
find
pathways
to
optimise
the
investment
in
equipment
and
build
a
pipeline
of
talent
that
can
use
this
capital
and
knowledge
base
to
create
future
wealth.
We
have
an
opportunity
to
undertake
policy
experimentation
and
catalytic
action
to
ensure
that
these
benefits
are
realised
and
optimized.
In
so
doing,
this
visionary
economic
development
program
can
provide
lessons
for
the
rest
of
the
developing
world.
Still
keeping
within
the
Caribbean
region,
I
strongly
recommend
that
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
draw
on
a
rich
intellectual
legacy
of
the
University
of
the
West
Indies,
and
build
on
that
working
in
cooperation
with
other
partners,
to
design
and
carry
out
a
much
needed
research
and
policy
program
that
articulates
a
deep
understanding
and
more
sophisticated
logic
of
the
nature
of
the
interrelationship
between
STI
and
sustainable
human
development.
More
than
30
years
ago,
the
Caribbean
region,
with
Canadian
funding
from
IDRC,
undertook
a
path-‐
breaking
research
program
–
the
Caribbean
Technology
Policy
Studies
program.
A
millennial
edition
of
this
program
is
much
needed;
it
would
13
build
on
the
work
of
Lewis,
Best,
Girvan,
Farrell
and
others,
while
taking
account
of
the
changes
in
the
political
economy
and
technological
environment
facing
this
region.
The
Caribbean
region
is
facing
challenges
of
serious
environmental
shock;
unsustainable
debt
level;
high
levels
of
structural
unemployment;
low
rates
of
growth
and
social
upheaval
and
yet
it
is
a
space
and
place
of
resilience,
inspiration,
creativity
and
cultural
richness.
There
is
struggle,
survival
and
always
the
emergence
of
world-‐
class
greats:
Lara,
Marley,
Bolt,
Minshall,
Walcott,
and
Williams,
and
those
are
just
the
most
recognizable
names.
A
set
of
interventions
focused
on
deep
engagement
with
the
nature
and
sources
of
innovation
in
the
Caribbean
would
allow
the
UN
system
to
help
where
it
is
most
needed
and
to
use
its
reach
to
convene
groups
of
stakeholders
and
build
coalitions;
processes
that
are
required
to
better
align
STI
with
human
development.
Working
through
and
with
the
United
Nations
would
allow
this
study
to
be
an
example
of
South-‐South
cooperation
as
it
could
be
designed
to
facilitate
cross-‐regional
exchange
among
Africa,
the
Caribbean
and
Asia
with
respect
to
recent
experience
with
STI
and
sustainable
development.
14
If
that
sounds
too
daunting,
let
me
suggest
a
place
to
start.
The
TFM
should
follow
up
by
introducing
any
innovation
competition
winners,
especially
those
from
the
Caribbean
region
to
the
UVI
RTPark,
StartUp
Caribe
(siliconcaribe.com)
and
ACI
Avantor
Commercial
Incubators
(acicaribbean.com),
all
of
which
are
private
sector
led
ecosystem
service
providers.
Ann
Mei
Chang
of
the
Global
Development
Lab
in
a
recent
interview
said
that
it
was
essential
to
involve
the
private
sector
in
scaling
up
development
efforts
and
not
only
for
their
financial
resources
but
for
their
particular
ways
of
doing.
Given
access
to
talent,
ideas
and
seed
capital,
we
have
the
potential
to
take
bold,
audacious
actions
and
deliver
results.
It’s
a
risk
worth
taking.
15
Conclusion
It
is
both
important
and
urgent
that
the
international
community
undertakes
important
interventions
to
better
align
STI
with
the
important
challenges
of
sustainable
human
development,
and
the
efforts
being
taken
by
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
are
laudable.
In
contributing
to
the
agenda
of
the
TFM
and
furthering
its
work,
I
have
suggested
that
it
is
important
to:
re-‐conceptualize
innovation,
science
and
technology;
diversify
and
democratize
sources
of
knowledge
that
inform
STI
doing
and
policy
making;
and
to
define
and
develop
more
effective
tools,
mechanisms
and
institutions,
paying
particular
attention
to
performers
of
innovation
in
the
private
sector
and
innovation
ecosystem
intermediaries.
I
look
forward
to
working
with
colleagues
to
making
these
goals
a
reality.
Without
leaps
of
imagination
or
dreaming,
we
lose
the
excitement
of
possibilities.
Dreaming,
after
all
is
a
form
of
planning.
-‐
Gloria
Steinem
-‐
Nations
Multi-‐stakeholder
Forum
on
Science,
Technology
and
Innovation
for
the
SDGs
Convened
by
the
President
of
ECOSOC
United
Nations
Headquarters,
New
York
City,
USA
6-‐7
June
2016
Panel
Presentation
Dr.
Gillian
Marcelle,
Executive
Director
University
of
the
Virgin
Islands,
Research
and
Technology
Park
1
Session
2:
on
“Enabling
Environment
for
Science,
Technology
and
Innovation”
(6
June,
11:30
–
13:00)
1
These
remarks
are
provided
in
a
personal
capacity
and
should
not
be
regarded
as
being
formally
representative
of
the
views
of
the
UVI
RTPark
or
the
University
of
the
Virgin
Islands,
nor
constitute
an
endorsement
by
the
US
Virgin
Islands
government.
2
Good
morning
ladies
and
gentlemen.
Thank
you
you
for
the
opportunity
to
contribute
to
the
inaugural
multi-‐stakeholder
Forum
on
science
technology
and
innovation
(STI)
for
the
sustainable
development
goals
(SDGs.)
I
wish
to
thank
the
President
of
ECOSOC,
H.E.
Oh
Joon,
the
Co-‐
Chairs
of
the
Forum
H.E.
Ambassador
Macharia
Kamau
and
Dr.
Vaughan
Turekian
and
the
organizers
of
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
for
this
invitation.
My
remarks
today
will
be
organized
around
three
main
themes,
which
are
as
follows:
Key
Ideas;
Pillars
of
Change
and
Recommended
Actions.
While
I
may
not
be
able
to
cover
these
areas
in
detail
in
my
brief
opening
statement,
am
prepared
to
expand
on
these
ideas
in
the
interactive
session,
as
well
as,
in
the
written
brief
that
accompanies
the
statement.
The
brief
will
be
available
from
the
organizers
and
online
at
CrossingWorlds
blog.
(http://crossingworlds.blogspot.com)
There
is
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
we
have
reached
an
important
inflection
point
in
thinking
about
and
doing
science,
technology
and
innovation
so
that
STI
delivers
benefits
for
humanity.
The
launch
of
the
sustainable
development
goals
(SDGs)
was
also
a
watershed
moment
for
3
the
international
community,
as
the
formulation
of
that
agenda
placed
sustainability
at
the
centre
of
the
development
defining
the
global
challenge
as
the
need
to
ensure
and
promote
peace,
prosperity,
and
well-‐
being
while
preserving
the
planet.
The
promulgation
of
that
agenda
recognized
the
scourge
of
a
growing
wealth
gap
and
rising
income
inequality.
The
international
community
has
also
acknowledged
the
challenges
inherent
in
decoupling
growth
and
employment
and
the
labour-‐saving
characteristics
of
technological
change.
For
the
last
fifty
years,
when
the
international
community
has
faced
serious
challenges,
there
has
been
set
of
guiding
propositions
and
key
assumptions
about
how
we
should
frame
responses
and
act
on
these.
Arriving
at
this
point
in
the
21st
century,
having
set
the
SDGs
as
the
goals
for
2030,
what
is
clear
is
that
the
old
ways
no
longer
serve
us
well.
Therefore,
this
Forum
comes
at
a
time
when
we
need
to
disrupt
the
status
quo
in
terms
of
thinking
about
and
doing
STI
for
development.
If
we
are
to
avoid
making
the
mistakes
of
the
past
and
produce
a
virtuous
cycle
of
change,
how
we
go
about
this
is
as
important
as
what
we
do.
First
and
foremost
we
need
to
draw
on
the
resources,
creativity
and
insights
of
all
groups,
not
only
those
occupying
positions
of
privilege.
This
will
not
4
only
greatly
enhance
the
moral
authority
with
which
we
tackle
global
problems
but
is
likely
to
increase
the
likelihood
of
successfully
delivering
meaningful
and
substantial
benefits.
I.
Key
Ideas
In
the
area
of
ideas,
it
will
be
necessary
to:
1. Expand
concepts
of
the
triple
helix
to
include
the
financial
sector.
Increased
access
to
and
variety
in
sources
of
finance,
particularly
risk
finance
are
vital
ingredients.
In
STI
circles,
a
great
deal
of
attention
has
been
paid
to
understanding
the
linkages
and
relationships
between
universities,
industry
and
government,
but
insufficient
effort
and
focus
has
been
placed
on
relationships
with
providers
of
financial
capital.
In
the
developing
world,
these
folks
are
often
not
in
the
room
or
even
part
of
the
conversation.
When
introducing
considerations
of
the
financial
system
in
this
agenda,
it
is
also
important
to
be
mindful
of
recent
changes
such
as
de-‐risking
of
the
financial
system
and
its
deleterious
effects
on
regions
of
the
world,
such
as
the
island-‐states
of
the
Caribbean
region.
2. Reconceptualize
innovation
as
a
set
of
processes
aimed
at
producing
private
and
social
value
in
which
bidirectional
exchange
of
knowledge
is
key.
The
secret
sauce
of
innovative
nations,
regions,
cities,
and
even
individual
organizations
has
been
shown
to
be
the
creation
of
an
5
enabling
environment
that
allows
actors
to
generate
and
circulate
ideas
and
knowledge
and
combine
these
in
ways
that
produce
value.
The
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
can
play
an
important
role
in
setting
out
a
critical
research
program
to
deepen
understanding
of
how
these
processes
work
in
the
developing
world.
We
cannot
simply
continue
to
rely
on
out-‐dated
formulaic
prescriptions
about
the
ratio
of
R&D
to
GDP
and
hope
for
the
best.
A
much
more
theoretically
bold,
granular,
context
specific
agenda
for
STI
and
development
is
required.
3. Embrace
technology
acquisition
and
knowledge
exchange
I
would
argue
that
to
move
forward
an
important
conceptual
shift
involves
abandoning
and
tossing
into
the
garbage
heap
of
history
the
notion
and
term
“technology
transfer”.
I
say
this
in
the
strongest
terms
because
if
the
developing
world
is
to
be
an
active
agent
of
change
participating
fully
in
the
technological
and
knowledge
age,
all
actors
must
be
considered
apriori
as
sources
of
knowledge
that
produce
value.
The
term
technology
transfer
and
the
processes
associated
with
it,
is
loaded
and
implies
a
source
of
the
knowledge
in
the
global
North
and
passive
recipients
in
the
developing
world.
6
Global
warming
and
the
other
deleterious
effects
associated
with
climate
change
did
not
take
place
because
of
superior
knowledge
in
the
global
North,
so
why
should
the
world
rely
on
these
actors
to
lead
the
international
community
in
designing
solutions
for
mitigation
and
adaptation
to
climate
change.
Democratization
of
knowledge
and
truly
embracing
reciprocity
is
required.
Perhaps,
its
important
to
recognize
as
a
starting
point
that
different
cosmologies,
value
systems
and
the
economic
and
political
systems
associated
with
them
produce
varying
environmental
effects.
With
that
assumption,
it
should
become
clear
that
the
shamans,
farmers,
and
community
leaders
of
the
rural
villages
across
the
planet
may
have
more
to
teach
about
resilience
and
sustainability
than
those
of
us
sitting
in
the
global
North.
Our
current
processes
for
sharing
knowledge
and
according
value
do
not
allow
for
those
voices
to
be
heard
and
for
their
perspectives
to
be
treated
with
equal
respect.
Even
beyond
the
issue
of
ensuring
diversity
across
sources
of
knowledge,
there
is
need
for
change
even
within
the
modern
and
industrialised
world.
There
is
recognition
that
within
countries
and
across
the
globe,
we
need
to
move
towards
generation,
production
and
diffusion
of
low-‐carbon
systems.
However,
the
pace
at
which
this
transition
takes
place
is
slowed
down
because
of
political
interests.
The
world
has
to
endure
a
delay
on
receiving
the
benefit
of
positive
multipliers
because
the
power
relationships
and
structures
that
created
the
negative
effects
of
climate
change
are
so
entrenched.
In
the
7
development
agenda
under
the
banner
of
technology
transfer,
these
organizations
are
in
the
forefront
of
offering
advice
to
the
rest
of
the
world
on
how
to
manage
the
transition
to
low-‐carbon
systems.
By
denoting
the
generation
and
exchange
of
technological
solutions
-‐-‐
technology
transfer
–
we
miss
the
boat!
The
global
community
needs
to
expand
its
search
for
solutions
and
to
support
active
technology
acquisition
strategies
and
bi-‐directional
knowledge
exchange
to
diffuse
those
solutions.
This
should
be
done
in
ways
that
do
not
reinforce
the
existing
patterns
of
inequality
and
concentration
of
wealth
and
power.
Environmental
degradation
takes
place
at
a
planetary
scale.
The
effects
of
consumption
and
production
patterns
in
one
part
of
the
world
have
impacts
thousands
of
miles
away.
These
effects
are
cumulative,
system-‐
wide
and
difficult
to
change.
Designing
and
deploying
solutions
will
require
cooperation
and
collaboration
without
the
presumption
of
the
one-‐way
flow
of
technological
systems
and
knowledge
from
the
global
North
to
the
rest
of
the
world.
8
4. Recognize
that
geography
and
practice
of
innovation
and
STI
effort
have
changed
dramatically
over
the
last
two
decades.
As
show
in
Figure
1
below:
Source:
National
Science
Board
(2010)
In
addition
to
changes
taking
place
within
the
formal
and
traditional
science
system,
there
is
also
growing
recognition
of
the
importance
of
non-‐formal
ways
of
knowing
and
non-‐science
based
pathways
to
innovation,
particularly
as
this
relates
to
innovation
for
social
purposes.
5. Avoid
technological
determinism.
The
relative
poor
performance
of
the
ICT
sector
in
terms
of
co-‐creating
outcomes
of
diversity
along
lines
of
class,
race,
gender,
sexual
9
orientation
and
national
origin
should
be
a
salutary
lesson
for
the
world.
Technology
is
too
important
to
be
left
up
to
unshackled
market
forces.
It
is
important
to
imbue
values
and
principles
of
justice,
equality
and
equity
into
the
agenda
and
to
have
in
mind
a
set
of
goals
that
incorporate
an
ethical
dimension.
Without
this
the
social
and
societal
components
are
left
to
one
side.
The
ICT
sector
produced
tremendous
growth
in
wealth,
notwithstanding
the
dot.com
boom
and
bust.
However,
this
sector
has
also
allowed
a
clear
view
of
what
happens
when
only
markets
rule
and
the
rules
of
the
game
are
survival
of
the
fittest.
The
overhyped
workplace
trends
that
peaked
in
the
last
decade
have
been
shown
to
be
only
well
suited
to
a
thin
slice
of
humanity
and
reinforce
behaviours
and
personality
traits
that
do
not
serve
us
well.
We
have
to
at
least
try
to
demonstrate
that
it
is
possible
to
develop
high
growth
dynamic
tech
sectors
that
are
not
also
associated
with
racism,
sexism,
homophobia
and
online
bullying.
II.
Pillars
These
ideas
can
take
root
and
bring
about
a
virtuous
cycle
of
growth
with
equity,
improve
human
welfare
and
well
being
if
we
pay
attention
to
the
following
important
pillars:
Values
and
Principles
that
promote,
secure
and
protect
human
rights,
justice,
equality
and
equity.
Catalysts
to
lead
action
and
convenors
to
bring
stakeholders
together
to
undertake
actions
using
appropriate
mechanisms
and
processes,
at
all
levels,
including
the
multilateral.
10
Mechanisms
and
processes,
including
the
multilateral
system
and
the
United
Nations.
This
set
of
actions
will
generate
resources
and
also
define
rules
for
allocation
of
those
resources.
It
will
help
to
set
goals
that
are
on
the
one
hand
aspirational
but
also
achievable.
III.
Recommended
Actions
I
wish
to
commend
the
organizers
of
this
Panel
and
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
for
making
a
start
on
this
important
effort,
at
this
time
when
it
is
needed.
In
the
preparatory
material,
we
were
asked
to
consider
what
would
it
take
to
entice
and
enable
STI
providers
to
address
the
challenges
of
the
most
vulnerable
and
marginalized.
This
shows
that
the
TFM
has
acknowledged
that
structural
realities
and
positions
in
global
systems
matter.
Sadly,
these
factors
shape
aspirations
and
ambitions
and
can
lead
to
paralysis.
The
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
stated
that
the
international
community
should
set
itself
a
goal
for
building
an
enabling
environment
that
is
both
attractive
to
foreign
investment
and
locally
supportive
of
innovation,
adaptation
of
technology
and
dissemination
of
knowledge.
11
This
is
very
much
on
point.
I
would
like
to
extend
an
invitation
to
the
TFM
to
collaborate
with
the
UVI
Research
&
Technology
Park
(https:rtpark.uvi.edu),
a
private-‐public-‐academic
partnership,
which
has
statutory
powers
to
attract
knowledge-‐based
and
technology
intensive
businesses
to
the
US
Virgin
Islands,
and
to
use
this
facility
as
a
test
bed
in
its
efforts
to
achieve
this
goal.
The
architects
of
the
RTPark
were
bold
and
visionary.
They
had
faith
that
technology
enabled
diversification
would
provide
a
growth
impulse
for
a
small
US
Territory
in
the
Caribbean,
where
the
population
is
only
just
above
100,000
and
the
traditional
mainstays
have
been
tourism,
agriculture,
rum-‐production
and
oil
refining.
This
unique
program
of
FDI
attraction
seeks
to
harness
the
benefits
of
US
laws,
pro-‐business
regulations
and
attractive
tax
incentives
to
build
a
sector
that
would
not
naturally
be
associated
with
this
place.
In
the
last
year,
the
Board
of
Directors
approved
a
new
strategy
allowing
the
RTPark
to
focus
on
partnering
with
impact
investors.
The
US
Virgin
Islands
has
benefitted
from
considerable
technological
infrastructure
investment
(both
publicly
and
privately
financed)
with
the
result
that
on
the
North-‐Western
tip
of
St
Croix
(as
the
most
Eastern
point
of
the
United
States)
there
is
a
landing
point
for
large
capacity
sub-‐terrestrial
broadband
cables
that
connect
into
Tier
1
peering
points
for
the
Internet
backbone.
There
is
also
a
high-‐speed
12
cable
ring
across
the
entire
Territory,
owned
and
operated
by
the
Virgin
Islands
Next
Generation
Network
(VI
NGN).
The
challenge
facing
the
US
Virgin
Islands
is
common
to
many
developing
country
regions;
we
must
find
pathways
to
optimise
the
investment
in
equipment
and
build
a
pipeline
of
talent
that
can
use
this
capital
and
knowledge
base
to
create
future
wealth.
We
have
an
opportunity
to
undertake
policy
experimentation
and
catalytic
action
to
ensure
that
these
benefits
are
realised
and
optimized.
In
so
doing,
this
visionary
economic
development
program
can
provide
lessons
for
the
rest
of
the
developing
world.
Still
keeping
within
the
Caribbean
region,
I
strongly
recommend
that
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
draw
on
a
rich
intellectual
legacy
of
the
University
of
the
West
Indies,
and
build
on
that
working
in
cooperation
with
other
partners,
to
design
and
carry
out
a
much
needed
research
and
policy
program
that
articulates
a
deep
understanding
and
more
sophisticated
logic
of
the
nature
of
the
interrelationship
between
STI
and
sustainable
human
development.
More
than
30
years
ago,
the
Caribbean
region,
with
Canadian
funding
from
IDRC,
undertook
a
path-‐
breaking
research
program
–
the
Caribbean
Technology
Policy
Studies
program.
A
millennial
edition
of
this
program
is
much
needed;
it
would
13
build
on
the
work
of
Lewis,
Best,
Girvan,
Farrell
and
others,
while
taking
account
of
the
changes
in
the
political
economy
and
technological
environment
facing
this
region.
The
Caribbean
region
is
facing
challenges
of
serious
environmental
shock;
unsustainable
debt
level;
high
levels
of
structural
unemployment;
low
rates
of
growth
and
social
upheaval
and
yet
it
is
a
space
and
place
of
resilience,
inspiration,
creativity
and
cultural
richness.
There
is
struggle,
survival
and
always
the
emergence
of
world-‐
class
greats:
Lara,
Marley,
Bolt,
Minshall,
Walcott,
and
Williams,
and
those
are
just
the
most
recognizable
names.
A
set
of
interventions
focused
on
deep
engagement
with
the
nature
and
sources
of
innovation
in
the
Caribbean
would
allow
the
UN
system
to
help
where
it
is
most
needed
and
to
use
its
reach
to
convene
groups
of
stakeholders
and
build
coalitions;
processes
that
are
required
to
better
align
STI
with
human
development.
Working
through
and
with
the
United
Nations
would
allow
this
study
to
be
an
example
of
South-‐South
cooperation
as
it
could
be
designed
to
facilitate
cross-‐regional
exchange
among
Africa,
the
Caribbean
and
Asia
with
respect
to
recent
experience
with
STI
and
sustainable
development.
14
If
that
sounds
too
daunting,
let
me
suggest
a
place
to
start.
The
TFM
should
follow
up
by
introducing
any
innovation
competition
winners,
especially
those
from
the
Caribbean
region
to
the
UVI
RTPark,
StartUp
Caribe
(siliconcaribe.com)
and
ACI
Avantor
Commercial
Incubators
(acicaribbean.com),
all
of
which
are
private
sector
led
ecosystem
service
providers.
Ann
Mei
Chang
of
the
Global
Development
Lab
in
a
recent
interview
said
that
it
was
essential
to
involve
the
private
sector
in
scaling
up
development
efforts
and
not
only
for
their
financial
resources
but
for
their
particular
ways
of
doing.
Given
access
to
talent,
ideas
and
seed
capital,
we
have
the
potential
to
take
bold,
audacious
actions
and
deliver
results.
It’s
a
risk
worth
taking.
15
Conclusion
It
is
both
important
and
urgent
that
the
international
community
undertakes
important
interventions
to
better
align
STI
with
the
important
challenges
of
sustainable
human
development,
and
the
efforts
being
taken
by
the
Technology
Facilitation
Mechanism
are
laudable.
In
contributing
to
the
agenda
of
the
TFM
and
furthering
its
work,
I
have
suggested
that
it
is
important
to:
re-‐conceptualize
innovation,
science
and
technology;
diversify
and
democratize
sources
of
knowledge
that
inform
STI
doing
and
policy
making;
and
to
define
and
develop
more
effective
tools,
mechanisms
and
institutions,
paying
particular
attention
to
performers
of
innovation
in
the
private
sector
and
innovation
ecosystem
intermediaries.
I
look
forward
to
working
with
colleagues
to
making
these
goals
a
reality.
Without
leaps
of
imagination
or
dreaming,
we
lose
the
excitement
of
possibilities.
Dreaming,
after
all
is
a
form
of
planning.
-‐
Gloria
Steinem
-‐