Discussions and Future Initiatives
3.4 Discussions and Future Initiatives
Discussions on the issues related to the topics above are as follows:
3.4.1 STI Indicators Discussions and Future Initiatives
(1) Mr. Dudi Hidayat, LIPI. The figure of 0.08% of GERD is often confused with science and technology budget to GDP. The figure of 0.08% is R & D activities budget. Budget figure for science and technology at the Ministry of finance has achieved 0.1%. But Pappiptek used of international standards, namely expenditure not budget.
(2) Djoko Pitono, Ministry of Agriculture. Partnership between government R&D institutes and industry is still weak. Industry should share their research fund to R&D institutes. Link and match condition should be expose not only by presenting data but propose future real action. By taking good example from Australia (Multi-culture), every companies give donation to the association for many activities that coordinated by the association, including research activities. These research activities can be accessed by universities and R&D institutes.
(3) Mr. Budi Triyono, LIPI. Continues survey on STI should be done by government in cooperation with industry and universities. In order to established self improvement of the data and information, on-line access should be provided to all STI stakeholders.
(4) Mr. Berto, Post Graduate Student, IPB. Indonesian participation in the international publication still left behind as compared to neighboring countries. Many Indonesian do not know how to publish their scientific articles in the international journal, some even do not have capacity writing scientific articles for international journal. LIPI and other stakeholders should provide international journal as scientific vehicles for Indonesian scientists.
(5) Ms. Sriyeni, Ministry of Industry. Since there is misunderstanding in the industries side about the results of applied research done by R&D institutes, there should be clear statement from industry about the research results needed by them.
(6) Mr. Gunawan, Post Graduate Student, IPB. R&D Employees mostly has diploma background. This reality should be further assessed, government and industry should concern about this reality, and OECD definition that used in this research should
be socialized to industries. (7) Mr. Andi Hasad, Post Graduate Student, IPB. R&D
expenditure of Indonesia only 0.08% from GDP. We should know how effective and efficient the use of that R&D expenditure.
(8) Mr. Rizal, Center of Innovation, LIPI. Developing STI indicators need many approach, not only the frascati manual, others references and approaches can be used as well.
(9) Mr. Ruben, LIPI. There should be STI policies that pro research for Indonesia.
(10) Mr. Dudi Hidayat, LIPI. After developing STI indicators, we should follow up by STI in-depth research. Indicators have to
be quantitative and completed with qualitative explanation.
3.4.2 ABG Partnership Discussions and Future Initiatives
(1) Dr. Bani Ranti, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce (ICC). There are four issues from ICC’s perspectives:
• How ICC can act as bridging institutions of universities and R&D institutes. Almost all companies in Indonesia are member of ICC
• Industries may not know what researcher do, and researcher only do their research for the sake of cum (researcher’s interest) without consulting industry or knowing the need of industry. There should be a regular meeting among industry, universities and R&D institutes.
• ICC has difficulties in establishing business model that comprise of R&D institutes, universities and businesses. Many of the collaboration based on individual expertise. There should be a further study on developing and establishing a collaborative business model.
(2) Ms. Sri Setiawati, Ministry of Research and Technology. Acceleration and Expansion Master plan Economic Development Indonesia (MP3EI) emphasized partnership among researchers, scientists, industry and all stakeholders. One of the concerns is how to increase added value of Indonesian commodity. Trust among participants in the ABG partnership, is a key to develop and establish effective transfer of technology. Availability of research funding is not the main issues for establishing ABG partnership. There has to be a real mechanism for doing things together (ABG). Indonesia’s main problems are in innovation and communication/networking. For this purpose, Ministry of Research and Technology has allocated incentive (funding) based on ABG collaborations scheme for future research.
(3) Mr. Tri Agus, PAPPIPTEK-LIPI. ABG Partnership and
innovation should be in the format of government policies. (4) Mr. Hendra Wijaya, Agro Practices, IPB. Results of LIPI’s
surveys and research should be forwarded to the right government institutions. Promote the use of ICT and develop ICT culture as a main means for developing ABG Partnership.
(5) Mr. Agus, IPB. In order to establish ABG partnership, trust and respect among institutions should be developed. STI indicators from LIPI should be linked with data and indicators publish by Statatistical Office (BPS).
(6) Mr. Ali and Mr. Rahmat, Post Graduate Students, IPB. For effective partnership purposes, socialization of partnership should be done continuously to all stakeholders. We move forward right now to green technology era, therefore we need this ABG partnership.
3.4.3 E-Forum on STI Discussions and Future Initiatives
(1) Prof. E. Gumbira Sa’id, IPB. There are several proposals on E- Forum implementations, namely: easy access on e-form; re- read and re-discussed topics that have been posted a few months ago;
(2) Mr. Darto, IPB. Connect e-form facilities with e-mails and use simple format.
(3) Mr. Dudi Hidayat, PAPPIPTEK-LIPI. There has to be someone (catalysator) who makes a synthesis of diverse opinions. Synthesizing discussions should consider problems on the contextual basis and what are the prerequisite successes in that country.
(4) Ms. Setiawati, Ministry of Research and Technology. In order to get regional issues, e-forum has to work together with Asian Committee.