Mapping Malta's socio-economic community

As Malta now gears itself to exploit the advantages of accession to the European Union, one of the limitations that need to be overcome is the absence of a research culture.

The EU drums up a regular spate of bilateral and multilateral projects, but the bidding for, clinching and execution of any such projects is a very serious business.

Apart from the administrative implications, the root feature of such project initiatives lies in their tapping and strengthening of the research capacity of a particular organisation, or cluster of firms, in EU member states.

Aware of the importance of research to boost competitiveness overall, the EU has determined that all member states should be dedicating at least 3% of their gross domestic product to research and development (R&D) activities by 2010.

Malta presents an interesting case study of research capacity. On one hand, thanks primarily to the presence and activity of STMicroelectronics, our economic indicators reveal a sizable percentage of our workforce (7.14%) engaged in technology-intensive, R&D activity; as well as a high contribution (22.4%) by hi-tech industries to the gross domestic product.

However, the state's allocation towards R&D is much more restricted. Furthermore, our obvious small size creates additional constraints on such factors as: the critical mass of research establishments, the availability of narrow specialisations, and the paucity of funding sources.

These considerations, however, are not supported by any empirical investigation. What are the characteristics of the Maltese research community, as determined by suitable fieldwork? The Workers' Development Centre at the University of Malta, spurred on by the Malta Council for Science and Technology (MCST) and (now Minister) Jesmond Mugliett, sought to investigate the nature and constitution of one particular local research community - that concerning socio-economic affairs. The investigation should also be considered in the light of the conclusions of the Lisbon European Council of March 2000, which include the need to identify centres of excellence.

Method

This pioneering exercise is prob-ably the first to try and map the characteristics of a community of researchers in Malta. It was done using the principle of co-nomination, whereby individuals indicate a set of up to six persons whom they believe are socio-economic "experts" in Malta today.

With such a "strawberry runner effect" under way, the exercise is deemed complete when a point is reached whereby the individuals being nominated have already been nominated by someone else. The starting point makes no difference, and leads to the same population.

The exercise is cheap and fast. The co-nomination process was launched in November 2001. Six individuals, three male and three female, operating in distinctly different fields of socio-economic expertise (tourism, gender, education, economics, welfare, politics, sociology and anthropology) were contacted by e-mail and informed about the project.

They were each invited to nominate six persons who, in their opinion, were "members of the local socio-economic research community". The basis of such opinions was not explored, leaving it up to the person making the nominations to decide on its meaning.

Of course, not everyone replied to the invitation, and not everyone tabled six nominees. However, by July last year, 23,019 distinct nominations had been received. The e-mail-driven exercise was brought to a halt at that point because new submissions were merely confirming those already on our list, indicating saturation.

Outcome

Of the nominees, 1,597 are men; 7,162 are women. The gender gap is significant and reflects the general marginalisation of Maltese women from research and development activity. Furthermore, women are more likely to nominate, and be nominated by, other women.

Some 7,662 nominees are members of the academic staff of the University of Malta. Of these, 18 (all male) are of professorial rank. This may be an obvious and expected outcome of the exercise; however, the dependence on the University of Malta for providing socio-economic research capability in Malta is excessive. The dependence would increase still further were one to include the academic staff at Junior College.

Within the University, the Faculty of Education (including its Youth Studies Programme) stands out with the largest number of nominees. This is followed by the Faculty of Arts - especially with its History and Sociology Departments - and FEMA (Faculty of Economics, Management & Accountancy), mainly with its Departments of Economics, Public Policy & Social Policy.

Indeed, of the nine nominees who receive more than six nominations each, eight (six of whom are male) are full-time members of the University staff. The Alma Mater is also likely to support private research initiatives by some of its staff members, who consider their connection with the institution as a vital selling point of their competence.

There is a perception of a cluster of socio-economic researchers operating in a number of state agencies or statutory bodies. These include Appogg, Central Bank of Malta, Employment & Training Corporation, Housing Authority, Malta Environmental Planning Authority, Malta Financial Services Authority, Malta Tourism Authority and the National Statistics Office.

Most of the individuals singled out here are engaged as visiting lecturers at the University of Malta, reinforcing the connection explained above; however, they may also enjoy a public profile by virtue of fairly regular contributions to the press and/or their participation on television programmes.

A few individuals associated with a political party have been mentioned as socio-economic researchers. The MLP can boast of Helena Dalli, Alfred Grixti, Robert Micallef, George Vella and Mario Vella. Strangely, no Nationalist candidates have found their way into this database of local expertise.

Perhaps, being associated with the party in government is seen to reduce one's ability to adopt a critical stance. Is toeing the party line seen to advance a dogmatism which is intellectually empoverishing? Indeed, the more critical Alternattiva Demo-kratika stands out even more, fielding Noel Agius, Michael Briguglio, James Debono, Mario Mallia and Harry Vassallo.

The number of researchers from the private sector is limited. Individuals associated with the main socio-economic consulting firms only find a token presence on the map.

The constituted bodies, the trade unions and members of the clergy are few and far between. The notable exceptions to the latter are Alexander Bonnici, René Camilleri, Peter Serracino Inglott and Carmel Tabone: three of these are, again, University academics. Is this indicative of a perceived lack of research initiative by largely conservative institutions? Is this perception false?

The list includes just two Maltese based abroad - Dr Paul Sant Cassia (UK) and Anne Marie Sciberras (The Netherlands) - as well as two non-Maltese anthropologists who have undertaken research in, and on, Malta: Jeremy Boissevain and Jonathan Mitchell. From the outside looking in, it is interesting to note that Boissevain managed to identify in his nomination the six individuals who received most 'hits'.

Discussion

A co-nomination system may not be the most objective manner for assessing anyone's credentials for being considered a member of Malta's socio-economic community. However, this exercise and its results suggest that the variables underlying one's informed choice have to do with: media (TV/print) presence or exposure; critical commentary of current affairs; and an academic status.

In Malta, these apparently are the key parameters determining socio-economic research expertise. Given the absence of a solid research tradition, and the clear dearth of published research output, academic status plus a media profile - or even a media profile by itself - are enough to bestow legitimacy. Joe (Peppi) Azzopardi and Lou Bondì may have secured their nomination for exactly this latter reason. This may be enough to establish a local reputation. However, it will certainly not be enough to establish our credentials in Europe.

The 23,019 nominees present interesting case material for appraising a number of interesting social cleavages. Apart from gender (discussed above), the nominees include young, up-and-coming social critics (associated mainly with Alternattiva Demokratika and Junior College) as well as seasoned University dons.

There is also a preponderance of academic membership, as against commercial/private sector ones. There is also a glimpse of dynastic inter-generationality, indicative of the power of blood relations in or society: David and Edward Zammit; Michael, Marie and Lino Briguglio. The database is also almost exclusively indigenous.

Prospects

The growth in local higher education since 1988 has meant that research activity has spread throughout a larger swathe of the Maltese population. However, the commitment of some academic members of staff to research is still uncertain; most long essays, dissertations and theses by University students on social science topics remain undervalued; and the focus of both staff and students on topical public policy issues for research purposes, and the dissemination of any results emerging therefrom, are largely ignored.

Politicians readily give the impression that they have the answers to the political questions of the day, without the need to either commission research and/or refer to professional expertise. The involvement of experts and technical personnel from civil society in the run-up to the March EU referendum may have started to change this self-righteous attitude. Only time will tell.

The small size of the local market and community, along with the absence of a research tradition, carries serious disadvantages. Identified experts are obliged to act as flexible specialists, moving from one expertise to the other simultaneously or successively, in tandem with shifting market demands and opportunities.

Fragmentation is rife, with most research being carried out by specific individuals, and therefore the ability to handle big projects with big budgets is curtailed. The relationship between public policy and the research community is also haphazard and subject to the manipulation of research entrepreneurs.

Finally, there has yet not been an identification of core areas of competitive research advantage for Malta; nor a concerted long-term policy to develop these niches as strengths within the evolving European Research Area (ERA) though one has to acknowledge the various attempts by the MCST at this.

Mapping our local research community in other areas - such as engineering or medical research - is bound to reveal a broadly similar pattern, with similar challenges.

Professor Baldacchino and Ms Sultana are director and research assistant respectively at the Workers' Development Centre of the Univer-sity of Malta. E-mail wpdc@ um.edu.mt.