Science and technology embody the paradigms, knowledge, skills and techniques by which we understand, relate with, control or exploit nature and--directly and indirectly--both ourselves and our neighbors. In many instances, the course of human history is, in part, the history of science and technology.

Economic development and social justice are not synonymous objectives. While economic development concerns itself with raising the indicators and statistics of the material wealth of the country, social justice stresses the equitable distribution of the benefits and opportunities of society.

But while these may not necessarily be the same, they are, nevertheless, intimately related: stable economic progress is reinforced by a society in which social justice prevails; social justice is enhanced by a healthy economy. In other words, while a healthy economy aims to provide a bigger pie, social justice ensures equitable slices. Ideally then, as we strive for economic development, we should also actively pursue the ideals of social justice.

Science and technology have become key components of modern economic development. No modern state can achieve or maintain prosperity without science and technology. However, the science and technology that promote economic development do not necessarily also favor social justice. The challenge for us is how to use science and technology to promote economic development with social justice.

The role of science and technology in economic development is very complex and their nature must be properly understood if they are to contribute to economic development. We tend to compartmentalize science and technology by considering them apart from the prevailing social, cultural and political milieu, as if they were completely independent of these. This view, of course, grossly distorts their role vis-a-vis society and culture because in reality all four interact strongly one with an another.

This brief essay aims firstly, to show the importance of the role of science and technology in the attainment of economic development with social justice, especially within the framework set by the 1986 Constitution. Secondly, we will discuss the role of science and technology education in this overall effort. Thirdly, we will attempt to locate science and technology within the wider national situation.



The decade of the 1980s marked significant shifts in development strategies. Previously, development was tied almost singularly to the country's natural resources. It was assumed that a country's wealth was assured by the natural resources that could be found within its borders.

The Philippine experience proved this not necessarily to be so. Despite the richness of our soil, forests, minerals and seas, we have remained poor and underdeveloped. Belatedly, we have begun to realize that the possession of rich natural resources is not sufficient to ensure progress. Unfortunately, we have been slow to learn from our mistakes. We shifted our attention from reliance on our natural resources, to reliance on our "skilled but cheap" labor force. In so doing, we have merely postponed (or shifted?) our crisis. Neither approach will lead to economic development.

Today, there are two contending positions on development strategies, an agriculture versus an industry-led strategy.1 We must note here that such a bifurcation is somewhat myopic; the discussion should instead revolve around what the proper mix should be. But whichever approach we emphasize, we should couple this to a strong science and technology base. Today, we can see that the newly industrializing countries (NICs), many of which are our own Southeast Asian neighbors, have taken this one step further: they have been emphasizing to their science and technology capabilities.

In order to maintain economic progress, the advanced and newly-advancing nations have been investing heavily in science and technology, and doing so pays off. Economic data show that the science and technology contribution to economic growth among the industrialized countries is 70 percent; among the NIC's, it is 45-55 percent and among the underdeveloped countries, 30 percent. In the Philippines, science and technology contribution to economic growth is estimated at 40 percent.

Since science and technology are demanded for economic advancement in the modern world, is this not sufficient reasons for us likewise to invest our resources in them? To develop a country's science and technology means putting aside the 2-3 percent of GNP (as recommended by UNESCO) for research and development, supporting more science scholarships and science and technology research institutes, and nurturing and protecting local industry against unequal competition from big multinational companies2.

While attainment of each of these goals would be a major achievement in itself (because none of these is being given enough attention by our government), these do not suffice to ensure national development. Science and technology have to be given proper direction and priorities; they cannot be isolated from the society in which it is placed. "external conditions" (a term which itself imposes an artificial classification of what is "in" and "out") affect the conduct of science and technology profoundly. It is implicit in the thesis of this essay that it would be a serious mistake to take science and technology out of the context of its surroundings. In other words, it is not self-contained; the relationship works in both directions: science and technology affect and are affected by the state of the economy and society, among other things.

Another important fact that arises from this is that science and technology are not cure-alls; they can help to solve our problems, but only if the proper conditions are present. We will discuss this point later.

Science and Technology: Similarities and Differences

Although we speak of science and technology almost as identical twins, they are not so. While science deals with the knowledge and understanding of nature and its laws, technology concerns itself with the application and uses of science. To the extent that science directly supports technological advances, the characteristics of the two are similar.

The linkage between the pure sciences and advanced technologies, being once removed, is less obvious and, in some cases, may border on the seemingly irrelevant. This should, however, not mislead us into thinking that the pure sciences have no tangible contribution to make. Although the emphasis of this essay is on technology, we should understand that the scientific aspects are also important to the degree that these promote technological advancement.

For example, scientific research into a biosynthetic mechanism can lead directly to biotechnology. In this case, it becomes very difficult to separate the applied sciences from the advanced technologies. But the "pure sciences" (disparagingly referred to as "esoteric"), apart from pursuing the frontiers of science, also interact with the applied sciences, providing these with fresh ideas. For example, mathematical models of enzyme catalysis may provide clues to the biosynthetic mechanism.

We have also incompletely understood technology to mean only the "hardware and techniques of production": the products, machines, industrial processes and balance sheet and management of production. We have overlooked the important aspect of how technology fits into the economic and social matrix of a nation. Depending on how a nation handles technology, it can liberate that nation from dependence or tighten the shackles of backwardness and poverty. Technology can be an instrument of domination.

The 1986 Constitution focuses on the aspirations of our people. It articulates the social conditions within which its laws and structures can have meaning. The constitution is therefore both a body of laws as well as a declaration of intent, a statement of guiding principles.

The attainment of a socially just society is one of the main guiding principles of our constitution. It stresses that the priority of our society and our government must be for the less privileged. The question that remains here is, how do we attain a society based on social justice? It is up to us to concretize this objective.

In another article in the Constitution (Article XIV, section 10), science and technology are cited as "essential for national development." However, the intention to develop these as leading to national development requires fleshing out.

Though the aspirations for social justice and strong science and technology are both present in the Constitution, what has not been given adequate recognition is the fact that these two objectives are related: the science and technology component is crucial to many of the social justice programs that we wish to enact. All our good intentions would come to naught if we did not have the ability to make them happen. We must realize that science and technology are not luxuries; we must stop looking at them as appropriate only for the rich and powerful countries. We need science and technology if we are to progress as a nation and if we are to attain our goal of social justice.



To assess the state of science and technology in the Philippines, we can use several indicators such as:

Human Resources. We can determine the number of scientists and technologists who are involved in science and technology in the country; we can determine their educational attainment and/or the level of their involvement.

Infrastructure. We can analyze the state of our laboratories, libraries, and equipment against the work that must be done. Do our scientists have adequate facilities with which to do their work?

Science and Technology Output. There are many ways that science and technology output can be assessed. Among researchers, there are scientific publications and research conferences. In industry, the state of science and technology can be seen in the quality of our locally manufactured or processed products. In agriculture, science and technology inputs give rise to increased, more efficient and high quality production. The state of science and technology is also reflected in the quality of the environment, public services, sanitation and health services, etc.

It is a sad fact that regardless of which indicator one chooses, the inescapable conclusion is that the state of science and technology in the Philippines is low3.

Building Science and Technology for the Philippines.

Technology has been aptly called a "social gene" that tends to reproduce around itself conditions favorable to its own survival. Technologies are developed to meet specific conditions such as material resources, energy, the socio-economic and educational level of the work force and of the user or consumer, financial and management practices, infrastructure, cultural preferences, national priorities, economic conditions and strategies, and many more. Technologies impose their own requirements and dynamics which manifest themselves in several ways. For example, the unnecessary obsession for the "state of the art" and "planned obsolescence" are characteristics of the high-tech age. The so-called "economies of scale" are oftentimes really determined by the "technologies of scale" where the demands of economies are really the demands of technologies.

For example, if we are to use effectively "high-yield varieties" certain conditions must be present: the technology itself for producing these high-yielding strains must be within our control; the farmer must be in a position to use the prescribed fertilizer and pesticide; he must have access to the proper equipment and irrigation; in certain cases, he must be able to alter his post-harvest practices during storage or milling; he must be able to secure financing, adapt to the new marketing situation and manage cash flows (activities he is not adequately trained to handle), etc. Thus, the introduction of "improved" varieties can have significant consequences for the farmer which will put him at a severe disadvantage if he is unable to cope with the changes this new technology entails.

Science and technology do not develop in a vacuum. Science and technology are often pushed in certain directions by factors external to their own dynamics, among the most significant of which are the economic and political factors.

The present rush to develop super-conductors has obvious economic and military motives (for example, computer development and electrical power transmission are economic goals; laser and SDI technology are military goals). It has stimulated so much research activity that US President Reagan once threatened to declare such research restricted. Ironically, the science behind it is at such an immature stage that it has been likened to alchemy. Thus, super-conductors will be swiftly developed, not so much out of scientific interest, as out of economic or military gain.

The much publicized US vs. USSR space programs were really extensions of the political rivalry between two competing powers. The immortalized "giant step for mankind" was really a propaganda coup for the US. It is hard to imagine what mankind, faced with problems of disease and starvation, stood to gain from having two people walk on the moon.

We should not pursue a direction in science and technology just because it happens to be the state of the art. As already mentioned, technological breakthroughs often arise as a confluence of technological advancement and economic or political conditions. When these ingredients are present, development is rapid. Therefore, we should not mistake the technological "state of the art" for what should be desirable for ourselves. We must take care that the technology we pursue is relevant to our own economic and political conditions. We must discern the nature of our technological choices and make modifications where necessary and possible.

Appropriate Technology

Because technologies invariably alter the prevailing conditions, any technology that we wish to introduce, be it local or foreign, must be scrutinized carefully both with regard to its technical, as well as its social, cultural and broad economic aspects. Such desirable technologies have been called by the amorphous term: "appropriate technology". Adopting a laissez-faire or careless attitude towards technology can be counter- productive.

However, the present parameters of appropriate technology are not enough; the technologies that we use must maintain links with the sciences. We need both the relevance of appropriate technology, as well as the creative potential of science. We must be able to blend both characteristics in order to evolve the science and technology that can be of benefit to us. They should adapt themselves to the economic and social conditions of the country. We should try to use the best of what is available and attainable for our own ends. Decisions as to whether this means taking a "high-tech" or "appropriate technology" approach will follow naturally from an understanding of our conditions and presuppose that we adequately understand science and technology. Moreover, this is not a static situation: as conditions change, what is appropriate also changes.

Science and Technology, Land Reform and the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Two major stumbling blocks stand in the way of meaningful change and by their interlocking relationships directly and indirectly stunt the growth of science and technology in the country, and consequently their ability to contribute to development. These two issues are land reform and the control of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund over our economic development plans.

Land reform seeks to correct our lopsided distribution of wealth in favor of the productive agricultural population which comprises about 70 percent of our country. It hopes to raise the incomes and the economic power of the majority of our people. But equally important, because our people will have greater control over the productive process, the importance of the technologies of production (and its related sciences) will be given more attention by a greater number of our people. Science and technology will prove to be more relevant and will tend to shift to meeting the demands of the small farmer. Even the government's Medium-term Philippine Development Plan, 1987-92 recognizes that without a meaningful Agrarian Reform Program its development strategies "will not generate a strong positive impact on the rural poor to sustain broad-based rural development." Without rural development, there can be no real social and economic development. Without real social and economic development, there can be no meaningful science and technology.

Our present subservience to the unequal economic order being defended by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund makes it virtually impossible for us to evolve a truly appropriate technology on a national scale. The WB-IMF prescription of short-sighted agricultural development and export-oriented industrialization will keep our agriculture, industry and science and technology vulnerable. The high-input Green Revolution approach, which necessitates the use of certain fertilizers and pesticides along with the planting of certain hybrid seeds, is a transplanted technology that has, on the balance, had detrimental effects upon the agricultural sector and the environment. Our multinational-dominated industry is linked to the world market to which it is perennially hostage. This situation forces us to adopt foreign technologies in order to compete in a foreign market, which takes precedence over our domestic needs. These technological imports are often inappropriate or irrelevant to our own needs and as a result make insignificant contributions to our science and technology.

Given our fundamentally unsound social and economic situation, science and technology cannot flourish. Their role within the prevailing conditions is severely circumscribed. For so long as the majority of our people are poor and our industry remains weak and without links to the rest of the country, local science and technology can provide only piecemeal solutions.



When we talk about the right to life in the new constitution, it means not only the right of physical survival but also the right to an acceptable quality of life. It means not simply living above the poverty line but developing a lifestyle that preserves human dignity and promotes the well-being of the whole society. Several priority areas mentioned in the constitution require science and technology components. Let us briefly enumerate these areas to see in what ways science and technology will be needed.

Labor. Although laws can safeguard the rights of labor, they cannot guarantee its place in industry. The role of labor is imbedded in the needs and capabilities of technology and industry. Today, labor is continuously being redefined by technology: the level of training and competence required changes with each technological innovation.

It is unfortunate that we generally equate "labor" with "physical labor" as if the only thing that labor can offer is its sweat. In this increasingly technological age, when robots and computers can produce more efficiently and swiftly than the best trained hands, what becomes of the future of labor? We cannot be Luddites and think that we can prevent the use of technology in order to save our jobs.

The challenge for science and technology is to try to develop technologies and tools that can improve the capabilities of labor. Educational institutions should pay closer attention to the role of labor in industry, whether in training the engineers who will design the factories and machines or in training the technicians who will work in these factories and run the machines.

Furthermore, science and technology should also improve the physical environment of labor, for example, in the safety design of an industrial plant or in developing anti-pollution devices.

Agrarian reform. One of the boldest commitments of the 1986 Constitution is to Agrarian Reform. However, for agrarian reform to succeed, sound science and technology-based agriculture should be developed. Unfortunately, we have been slow to understand the science and technology challenges of agriculture in general, and of agrarian reform in particular. Specifically, technology for the small farm must be developed. This must be affordable, practicable and efficient. We should not assume that methods that work for large, capital-intensive farms will be best for small ones. Article XIII, section 5, recognizes that the State "shall provide support to agriculture through appropriate technology and research . . . ."

Natural resources. Our natural resources are both our patrimony and our continuing source of livelihood. The environment must be understood and protected even while we continue to harness our natural resources. This will be an ever more difficult task as the pressure on the use of our natural resources increases. If we are to care for our environment, we must first understand it. In this, science and technology are critical.

Urban land reform and housing. Urban land reform and housing go beyond the problems of squatting and land ownership. They are about the intelligent design and use of limited space and resources in ways which befit the dignity of the person; they concern urban pollution and efficient, reliable and affordable mass transport. Science and technology must be tapped if we are to meet these challenges.

Health. Most aspects of health care ultimately depend on our science and technology capabilities. Unfortunately most people equate health care only with doctors and nurses, but it covers a much wider area. Health care requires pharmaceuticals, nutrition, environmental sanitation, control of disease vectors, and much more. Unless we have the science and technology for these other aspects, we will never solve our health problems.

Energy. While the issue of energy is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is nevertheless a very important matter because it affects all economic activity and impacts upon our environment. Presently, we rely on imported fuels for most of our energy needs. Although we have been successful in developing alternative sources, notably geothermal ones, we must pursue energy research more vigorously.

We have outlined only some of the science and technology components involved in the pursuit of social justice. As is apparent from this brief discussion, these concerns are real scientific and technological challenges in themselves. We must realize that we ourselves must solve these science and technology problems.


What are the implications of these for the teaching of science and technology in universities; what approach must be adopted? In order to apply these to our needs intelligently, we must be able to understand as thoroughly as possible both our needs on the one hand and science and technology on the other. This implies a mature understanding of both science and technology and the social and economic conditions of our country.

The educational sector is urgently needed to effect the conditions for science and technology to grow. Its response has three aspects: 1) the development of human resources; 2) the creation of a climate conducive towards science; and 3) the emergence of a vision of science and technology that is truly Filipino. We have to reevaluate our total approach towards science education, since we need to develop not just basic skills, but also attitudes and awareness of our needs.

The Development of Human Resources

Science and technology are not only skills and techniques anyone can learn; they are not only formulas and data which one can recite to prove how much one knows. Nor are they only books and journals one can read, or only computers and other sophisticated instruments that impress the uninitiated. More importantly, science and technology also means logical thinking, creativity, and resourcefulness.

One of the mistakes of our present method of science education is that we tend to teach the sciences as if these are merely facts to be memorized, as pre-determined knowledge whose "truth" we can only accept and not question and probe. While some of this memory game is needed, more importantly science education should also be an experience of discovery and understanding; it should be able to translate science into things familiar to the student. Science education must be able to demonstrate clearly the unity between theory and reality. Our science education also tends to be strictly content-oriented. Although this is not undesirable in itself, it must not forget to develop logical, scientific thinking.

Science education should also aim to produce broad-minded scientists and technologists. It should turn out scientists and technologists who have good solid backgrounds in their respective fields, and who can work independently and with confidence even in fields directly outside of their own.

The demands of modern scientific and technological education are beyond the means of most educational institutions. While we try to cover these advanced topics in a lecture course, most school laboratories and equipment fail to meet the needs of such a system. Thus the over-reliance on book knowledge.

Our science education suffers also from the lack of properly trained science teachers. How many grade school, high school, or even college teachers are asked to teach chemistry, even if their actual training involved only a minimum of units in the subject? Aside from insufficient educational preparation, the work load of the teacher leans heavily on the book and not on experiments, since the latter require experience and time.

Finally, there has been very little impetus to improve general science education. For the moment, the status quo seems to be the easiest way out because improvements, in terms of teacher training or upgrading facilities, require financial support.

The human resources to which we refer are, therefore, of two types. One involves the education of scientists, engineers, technologists, etc.; the other involves properly-trained science teachers.

Creation of a Climate Conducive to Science

Though our everyday lives are increasingly being influenced by science and technology, we adopt a fatalistic attitude toward all these changes. It is not difficult to understand how one can feel helpless against the power of science and technology that we can neither understand nor control.

Modern technology has brought about a "black-box mentality". We are satisfied with treating most things as black boxes since that saves us the effort of having to understand them. We drive cars without really knowing how they run; we buy the elegantly packaged toilet cleaner although it is nothing more than the lowly muriatic acid. Inquiry and analysis seem to be losing out in our education and everyday lives.

We need to train not only the operators of technology, but the innovators and creators as well. Computers are an example. While undeniably they are very powerful tools for the manipulation of data, it still takes a real expert to know where these can be used most effectively. We must be able to adapt the computer to our needs instead of forcing ourselves to adapt to the computer. This may require writing new programs, or fabricating one's own hardware. What we need, therefore, are more than just technicians; we need problem-solvers, designers and innovators.

Modern technology tends to estrange us from our environment. We have become unmindful of the future, forgetting depletion of resources, destruction of the ecosystem, and pollution of the environment. Many modern (so-called "efficient") societies are throw-away societies in which nature no longer provides, technology does; the rallying cry is, "Technology has the answers!"

How can we break out of this prison of ignorance and helplessness? In the study of science and technology we must be able to grasp the fundamental theories of science, understand their power and their limitations. We must be able to sift the truly important from the merely intriguing. This means developing a breadth of knowledge regarding science and technology that is not only up-to-date, but comprehensive as well. Such an approach demands the best minds with the best training.

Interdisciplinary interaction should be encouraged. Given the complexity of the problems before us, multi-dimensional solutions are often required. The errors of many development projects arise precisely because of this lack of dimensionality.

Even non-science majors should be aware of the implications of science and technology, because many will become economic and political decision-makers. We should therefore, emphasize the appreciation of science and technology also for non-scientists and non-technologists as well. Ideally, the total education of any student should involve appreciation and some understanding of the general field of science.

Science and technology also thrive in a society where scientific careers are available, financially rewarding and socially respectable. Such careers can flourish only with both government and private support. The proper climate for this can be achieved only when science and technology are viewed as an integral part of society.

Emergence of a Truly Filipino Vision of Science and Technology

What is this "truly Filipino vision" of science and technology? While there is no fixed definition, the search is very much alive. We need scientists and technologists who have the proper training and vision for our country, whose abilities lie not only in being able to solve equations and discuss theories, but also in being able to perceive the problems, and translate their knowledge to working solutions in the Philippine context.

A number of specific steps have been undertaken in this direction. For example, industry-academe interaction emphasizing problem-solving and curriculum development can serve as a very effective and mutually profitable linkage. Outreach programs can also include exposure to the technical problems of various communities. The writing of textbooks which emphasize local problems and conditions can help focus our consciousness on our own situation.

We must be able to understand our needs and mold to meet them. This gives the imprint of "being Filipino".



Adequate and proper science and technology education is necessary if we are to lift ourselves out of this state of under development. Unfortunately, science and technology education is expensive and as a nation we have been unwilling to give science and technology education adequate support. Their teaching in both state and private colleges and universities suffers from a shortage of good teachers and adequate facilities. Since unarguably we need quality science and technology education as a social enterprise, the question arises: who should pay for all this?

Science and technology in the Philippines cannot be left in their present uncertain condition. They need substantial government financial support and considering the high cost of equipment, laboratories, library and competent faculty and staff, clearly firm government commitment is necessary. In fact, in all advanced countries (including the emerging ones) the government plays an important role in supporting science and technology education. There is no other way.

In the Philippines this must be given direction because it is a social enterprise; it must be planned and put in the context of the development needs of the country. Science and technology education must be seen as necessary components of our development strategy.

One of the reasons for the brain-drain is that oftentimes our higher science and technology education is inappropriate for our needs. Talented and trained students are frustrated when they cannot find appropriate work commensurate with their training. Coupled with the low financial rewards, this drives them abroad.

In the Philippines, due to historical circumstances, about 75 percent of higher education is in the private sector. The issue of providing government funds to private education is a tricky problem, especially because the government pie is too small to start with. Certainly, this issue should be discussed further and placed within the context of the development scheme.

Proper science and technology education should address both the needs of survival in the modern world, as well as the challenges of social justice. Upon closer scrutiny, these are really two faces of the same coin.

The support of science and technology eduction is a matter of national will and priority because the undertaking will demand significant investment of resources. But it is an investment we cannot afford to ignore because the consequence will be costlier.


Today, despite the resolute intentions of the Constitution and the inspired projections of the 1986 NEDA 5-Year Plan, science and technology still rate very low in our development strategy, and the commitment to economic development with social justice needs to be pushed further. These challenges can be overcome only if we are able to develop the relevant science and technology capabilities that will enable us to grow sufficient food with the least cost to the environment, to manufacture goods with the appropriate technology, to provide our people with shelter, to produce energy at low cost and with minimal harm to the environment, to optimize the use of this energy, to maintain a high standard of health, and to protect and preserve the ecosystem.

The role of science and technology in promoting social justice is very important and, in this, such education plays a major role. The education sector, by the ideas and values it promotes and the students it molds and educates, must lead in the promotion of science and technology for social justice.

Finally, we should keep in mind that science and technology play only supportive roles in attaining the twin goals of economic development and social justice. They can do only as much as society and the political system allow. Science and technology alone will not stop forest denudation, nor will it solve our excessive dependence on multinational industry.

In the final analysis, the challenge to build a socially just and prosperous society is primarily not within the power of science and technology, which are merely supportive; ultimately the challenge is political. But, if we can muster the will to decide our own national development, so we also can master the science and technology to move our country forward.

Ateneo de Manila University



1. Discussion of the agriculture-vs-industry strategy is beyond the scope of this paper. However, two points should be mentioned in this regard: a) This should not be an either-or choice. Rather, the strategy should involve a mix of the two. The debate should center only on the issue of emphasis. b) This should be seen as an evolving situation. Adoption of one approach does not completely eliminate the other.

2. Government support for local industry is suggested as an initial measure, not necessarily as a permanent feature. This can take various forms such as tariff protection, funding for the necessary science and technology requirements, education scholarships, etc.

3. Let us apply these indicators using the field of Chemistry as an example.

a) Human resources. There are very few active Filipino PhD chemists in the country. (By "active" is meant one who engages in a scientific or technological activity such as research or industry-related projects.) About 35 of these are distributed among some 8 schools in the country. Chemistry PhD's make up less than 5 percent of the total college level chemistry faculty. While the necessity for PhD training should not be over-rated, it must nevertheless be recognized that the sophistication of modern chemical science requires considerable advanced training.

b) Infrastructure. In general, our chemistry laboratories are under-equipped and ill-maintained. Chemicals, glassware and instrumentation are prohibitively expensive for most laboratories, whether academic or industrial. Needless to say, one can't do chemistry without a lab. Books and journals, both of which are costly items, are not available for the most part.

c) Science and technology output. The amount of scientific accomplishment put out by our researchers is small, and these usually come from only a few laboratories. Local scientific publications are hard to come by and those available often come out late for lack of articles to publish. The contribution of local chemical Science and technology to industry is small. Industry usually relies instead on foreign patents and licensing agreements.


Bienvenido F. Nebres. "Science and Technology Directions and NSTA Reorganization," paper presented on April 21, 1986, at a symposium organized by SIKAT and UPAC Science and Technology Task Force; "Science and Technology Manpower Outlook and Strategies in the Basic Sciences," talk given on September 26, 1985 at an NSTA seminar on Scientific and Technological Manpower Development

t. David Dickson. Alternative Technology and the Politics of Technical Change. U.K.: Fontana Books, 1974.

Fabian M. Dayrit, "Contemporary Challenges to Science and Technology," paper presented at the Ateneo de Manila University on the occasion of the Academic Symposium to commemorate the 125th year of the Ateneo, Sept 6, 1984.

Steven Rose and Hilary Rose. Science and Society. London: Penguin

Books, 1969.

Susantha Goonatilake. Aborted Discovery: Science and Creativity in the Third World. London: Zed Books, Ltd., 1984.

Technology as an Instrument of Domination. Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1984.

Technology from the Underside, Report of the Consultation on New Technology and the Environment sponsored by the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches of the Philippines, January 10-15, 1986, Manila, Philippines.

Willem Riedijk. Technology for Liberation. Delft University

Press (Netherlands), 1986.