Saya suguhkan disini dua artikel yang saling bertentangan tentang Mega-Projek Mochtar Riady Center for Nanotechnology (MRCN) untuk dinilai sendiri oleh para pembaca. Yang pertama bernada negatif, ditulis oleh seorang mahasiswa S3 (Ph.D. candidate) dari salah-satu universitas di Amerika, yang kedua bernada sangat entusiastik, diltulis oleh Roy Sembel, Direktur MM Finance and Investment, Universitas Bina Nusantara, dan Danny Eugene, Dosen MM Universitas Bina Nusantara. Kedua artikel tersebut bisa diakses melalui Internet pada alamat2 URL/website yang saya sertakan diatas masing2 artikel, terlepas dari pertanyaan apakah benar MRCN kini sudah ditutup (mohon konfomrasi dari pembaca).
Salam, Indoshepherd [1] http://www.fica.org/crosspoint:xp-0510-article2 Indonesia's Megaprojects: Anxious Vision, Weak Foundation oleh Haryadi S. Gunawi (PhD candidate in Computer Science at University of Wisconsin Madison) fica.org/crosspoint:xp-0510-article2 It has become a common knowledge that the process of acquiring and mastering technology know-how is evolutionary, gradual and long term. Not only this concept has become common knowledge, but also has been accepted as theories and guidelines by many developing countries. Oddly, when it comes to practice, many industries are pushed to move forward too quickly and too anxiously to the more advance stage of creating new technologies and products, even before fully realizing the compulsory earlier stages of technological absorption. Without a doubt, such large commitment of resources to the development of high and new technologies can back-stab the investment, resulting in dangers such as inefficiencies in resource usage, wasted efforts, slower economic growth and many others. Indonesia is well-known in employing such "megaprojects" in the past. People obviously will say "sure, what's wrong with it?" In fact we will see later that the rationales behind megaprojects are virtuous and praiseworthy. Hence, it is not strange why such megaprojects gained tremendous support politically and communally in their birth. Nonetheless, we recognize that not all of them succeeded. In this paper, we will review how scholars looked into the two issues of a well known megaproject, which was initiated by the ex-President Habibie during his administration as the Minister of State for Research and Technology. His megaproject reveals the unreadiness of Indonesia on this "jump-start" and the inappropriate political support. Then, we will take a glimpse of our neighbor's approach. Finally, we try to digest how this megaproject issues are actually close to the individuals of Indonesian scientists and engineers studying overseas, especially ones studying in developed countries. Unreadiness of Our Country In most cases, when one read the megaprojects' proposals, one would be amazed and probably agree as their goals are virtuous and praiseworthy. For example, the ex-President Habibie when he was still the Minister of State for Research and Technology was concerned that Indonesia, as a developing country, will be unable to catch up with developed countries; that Indonesia is rapidly increasing its productivity without participating actively in the Science and Technology revolution [1]. What Habibie meant by revolution was that Indonesia must be able to compete with other countries in a more advanced and new technological production. He continued stating that if developing countries are not part of this revolution, they will be excluded from the circle in which important decisions affecting global futures are made. Many of us would believe and agree with such motivation. Even more, it might be the case that one of our visions sound similar with the ex-President Habibie's vision. Is Indonesia ready for this vision? Are our visions matched with what Indonesia currently needs? Rice [1] emphasizes strongly the unreadiness of our country to such vision. First, he stated that we must realize Indonesia still has abundant unskilled labors and natural resources. It is true that the larger cities have more capable and educated people who are more ready for healthy competition, that they have sufficient and qualified resources (human and investment) to be drained to this advanced direction. However those people comprise only a tiny percentage of the total Indonesia population. But then, the question left is: should those resources be committed to megaprojects? Rice states that using scarce resources in developing new technologies has costly implications: fewer resources are available for accessing and adapting imported technologies. These imported technologies could eventually enable Indonesian products to compete with those of firms from industrialized economies. In other words, as Hill states [2], Indonesia will continue to be a technology importer for the near future. Some basis technological competence is much more needed simply to assess, assimilate and diffuse imported technology rather than developing competence in technology revolution. Logically put, if we have 10 generals and 1000 soldiers, would we use the 10 or most of the generals to invent new guns or have them train the 1000 soldiers? Inappropriate Political Support The second common issue of megaprojects is that they enjoy considerable, and might be inappropriate, political and community support because they are seen as convincing illustrations to overcome the country's technological backwardness. People also hope that such megaprojects can short-cut the long and tough process of technological development. Hence such megaprojects are accepted and huge resources are committed to them. What makes it worse is that the whole process is not properly evaluated such as that in Habibie's case. During Habibie's reign, all initiatives have been directly under his control: "no major decision could be taken without his approval, no performance statements were released, no checks and balances were present, and not even the powerful technocrats in the cabinet have been able to challenge Habibie's direct access to the was President Soeharto" [3]. Controversially, in June 1994 while he was the Minister of State for Research and Technology, Habibie successfully persuaded President Soeharto to grant a loan to the next CN-250 $185 million project from the government's reforestation fund, even though previous sales had been disappointing. There has been no attempt to justify investment in IPTN as superior to investment in other sectors such as improved primary and secondary education for example. IPTN's $3 billion investment has never been publicly inspected. Since the Habibie camp had controlled both the Education and Technology Ministries in the 1993-98 cabinet, these sorts of questions were not politically realistic exercises. Learning from Our Neighbor So far we have seen the two pitfalls of megaprojects approach particularly for Indonesia. First, in unreadiness of the country, such great leap will actually consume resources in an inefficient way. Second, megaprojects are commonly promoted by high-ranking officials or conglomerates, hence free from fair inspection and evaluation. For this reason, it's noteworthy to take a look at other country's approach that does not employ such megaprojects as their ultimate weapons. In the Southeast Asian context, the case of Malaysian electronics industry [4] illustrates the process of acquiring and mastering technical know-how in an evolutionary and gradual way. The Malaysian industry is sometimes criticized in Indonesian (and of course Malaysian) circles as being a case of shallow and foreign-dominated industrialization. However, Malaysia confirms the importance of good fundamentals, defined as "macroeconomic management, international orientation, and a good educational base, supplemented by specialized technical and management training industries". Hence, Hobday [4] shows that actually spill-over effect of innovation already occurring within this foreign-dominated industry, implying that domestic competence has been increased firmly. He emphasizes that this innovation is " not radical or R&D based but is incremental also inextricably linked to domestic capabilities". Malaysia's case is strongly correlated with Lipsay's statement in [5]: " expectations [of successful intervention] are poor for big technology pushes that require massive changes in the existing facilitating structure or even the development of wholly new structures; the successes have tended to be those that accept the path dependency of technological change, going for significant advances that build on existing strengths and not trying for great leaps in the technological dark that unfortunately seem to attract politicians". Regardless of what have passed, Indonesia and each of us should now understand the imminent dangers of such ambitious high- tech initiatives. New Directions? Since the failure of Habibie's approach, many scholars have proposed new and conservative directions. Given Indonesia's shortage of human capitals, some scholars suggest Indonesia to move into more medium- technology industries, like what South Korea and Taiwan did in the 1980s. World Bank evaluation report stated that Indonesia's industrial technology development should consist of assimilation of imported technologies rather than more innovative design and development of new work. Hill [2] doubts whether ambitious high-tech investment projects could contribute significantly to efficient technology developments, particularly when the underlying research and education infrastructure is still rather weak. Bottom line is at Indonesia's stage of industrialization; it would seem preferable to favor the "general" over the "specific" wherever possible. It would be much more make sense if larger fraction of the resources is committed to building a stronger foundation rather than jumping into the head of the vision. Oddly, many of these new and conservative directions seem to come out to the surface only after the big failure of Habibie's megaproject. But can we quickly conclude that megaprojects are bad for Indonesia? Can we conclude that Habibie's vision is way out of line? Or is it because we build the vision on a weak foundation? It might not be the case that all megaprojects are a purely No No for Indonesia. Perhaps what might be needed are megaprojects that are based on our core capability, whatever it is. This is still a widely opened study and many questions are still up in the air; what approaches are best for Indonesia? When we are conservative, can Indonesia move on? Indonesia Center of Nanotechnology: The 2nd Habibie? The recent closing of Mochtar Riady Center for Nanotechnology demonstrates the relevancy of this megaproject's issues even nowadays. One of the big goals of the Mochtar Riady Center for Nanotechnology is to heal Indonesia's economic difficulty [6]. Right now, not so many articles available out there that explains and criticizes the internal flaws of this giant leap in bioengineering field. Two reasons are plausible: it was closed in its early phase and secondly it uses private funds in majority, hence not many people nation-wide have interest in criticizing and analyzing the problem. However, the skepticism is likely not so much different with one of Habibie's IPTN approach; In Habibie's approach, people says "Indonesia tried to build an airplane, while it couldn't build a car". Here, Indonesia does not have the quality if not the capability in producing a micro-meter technology, yet it tries to leap to nano-meter technology. Bottom line, the vision of Indonesia entering nanotechnology era is not hurtful, but again the method and all the foundation where the vision should live on must be very strong. It means all aspects of education, businesses, market, economy, and political situation must play into account. Reflection The issues discussed in this paper and all the aspects they lead to suggest us to always reshape and sharpen our vision for Indonesia. Some of us who study in developed countries, tasting the advanced state of the art of technology, might unconsciously have our own megaprojects mindset to be applied to Indonesia the first day we step our foot on our beloved Indonesian soil. What this article brings is to encourage us to keep aligning our vision with what Indonesia's current needs and the best way we could serve her in increasing her capability in science and technology. Haryadi Gunawi is a PhD candidate in Computer Science at University of Wisconsin - Madison. References [1] Rice, Robert C (1998), The Habibie Approach to Science, Technology and National Development, in H. Hill and T.K.Wie (ed.) Indonesia's Technological Challenge, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 185-198. [2] Hill, Hal (1995), Indonesia's Great Leap Forward? Technology Development and Policy Issues, in Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, Vol. 31, No 2, August 1995, pp. 83-123 [3] Hill, Hal (1998), Introduction, in H. Hill and T.K.Wie (ed.) Indonesia's Technological Challenge, [4] Hobday, Michael (1999), Understanding Innovation in Southeast Asia: Malaysia's Experience in Electronic, in K.S. Jomo (ed.), Malaysia's Industrial Technology [5] Lipsey, R.G. (1997), Globalization and National Government Policies: An Economist's View', in J.H. Dunning (ed.), Governments, Globalization and International Business, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 73-113 [6] Sembel, Roy (2004), Small is Beautiful: Memanfaatkan Nanoteknologi untuk Mendorong Pemulihan Ekonomi, wartaekonomi.com Copyright (c) 1994-2005 Fellowship of Indonesian Christians in America. All rights reserved. ---------------------------------------------------------- [2] http://www.wartaekonomi.com/detail.asp?aid=3405&cid=9 Oleh:Roy Sembel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Direktur MM Finance and Investment, Universitas Bina Nusantara Danny Eugene, Dosen MM Universitas Bina Nusantara Small is Beautiful: Memanfaatkan Nanoteknologi untuk Mendorong Pemulihan Ekonomi Jum'at, 5 November 2004 01:32 WIB - warta ekonomi.com Ungkapan small is beautiful sudah sering kita dengar. Mengatur perekonomian dengan membagi ke dalam unit-unit kecil ternyata lebih indah dibanding dalam skala global. Pengalaman Indonesia melewati krisis ekonomi tahun 1997 membuktikan asumsi tersebut. Saat banyak perusahaan besar berguguran, karyawan di-PHK dan pengangguran meningkat, ternyata usaha kecil menengah (UKM) menjadi penyelamat ekonomi Indonesia. Maka, tak heran kini sejumlah bank berlomba membentuk divisi yang khusus melayani UKM. Tren small is beautiful juga melanda industri peralatan elektronik, seperti handphone dan komputer. Dulu ukuran handphone sangat besar, sehingga mustahil masuk ke dalam saku. Kini handphone sedemikian mudah digenggam. Mungkin sudah saatnya istilah handphone diganti menjadi palmphone. Juga komputer, saat pertama kali diperkenalkan, ukuran CPU-nya tak lebih kecil dari sebuah ruangan. Namun kini sebuah laptop memiliki kemampuan mengolah data jauh lebih besar dan cepat. Jika 30 tahun lalu satu chip komputer hanya memuat 2.250 transistor, kini sudah 42 juta transistor. Kian kecilnya ukuran komputer atau handphone ini tak lepas dari kemajuan teknologi mikroelektronika. Sudah cukup. Belum. Pada awal 1990-an Dr. Rohrer, pemenang Nobel Fisika tahun 1986, memprediksi bahwa teknologi mikroelektronika ini akan segera diganti oleh teknologi yang lebih maju, yang mampu membuat komponen elektronik dengan ukuran yang 1.000 kali lebih kecil. Namanya nanoteknologi. Teknologi Sepermiliar Meter Nanoteknologi bertujuan melakukan rekayasa, memanipulasi dan mengontrol sebuah objek dengan ukuran nanometer (sepermiliar meter). Rekayasa ini dilakukan oleh "mesin-mesin" seukuran molekul yang diciptakan khusus untuk tujuan tersebut. Ide awal nanoteknologi ini dicetuskan pada 1959 oleh fisikawan pemenang Nobel, Richard Feynman. Dalam ceramahnya yang berjudul There is Plenty Room at The Bottom, ia mengatakan bahwa materi dapat disusun atau diubah dengan cara memanipulasi dan menggabungkan atom- atom pembentuknya. Misalnya, dengan nano-teknologi kita dapat membuat materi, seperti kayu, dengan merangkai sejumlah atom untuk menggantikan kayu alam yang persediaannya kian menurun. Namun baru pada 1980-an nanoteknologi menemukan bentuknya. Adalah K. Eric Drexler, fisikawan dari MIT, yang mematangkan konsep ini dan menamakannya molecular nanotechnology. Menurut Drexler, nanoteknologi adalah teknologi yang sangat berguna bagi semua aspek kehidupan manusia, mulai dari aspek ekonomi, kesehatan hingga lingkungan hidup. Dalam bukunya Engine of Creation (1986), Drexler menjelaskan konsep dasar dari nanoteknologi. Ia menyatakan bahwa sebuah materi terbentuk dari atom-atom yang saling berhubungan, yandisusun seperti menyusun lego. Dengan mengubah lego (atom), akan didapat sebuah bentuk (materi) baru sesuai keinginan. Dalam buku keduanya, Unbounding the Future, Drexler menggambarkan kemudahan yang dapat dinikmati manusia dengan memanfaatkan nanoteknologi. Dalam bidang kesehatan, melalui nanoteknologi dapat diciptakan "mesin nano" yang disuntikan ke dalam tubuh guna memperbaiki jaringan atau organ tubuh yang rusak. Untuk industri logam, dapat diciptakan sebuah materi logam alternatif yang murah, ringan dan efisien, yang dapat menekan biaya produksi kendaraan, mesin dan lainnya. Penerapan Nano-Teknologi Jepang dan AS merupakan dua negara terdepan dalam riset nanoteknologi. Berdasarkan data tahun 2002, pemerintah Jepang mengeluarkan dana riset US$1 miliar, sementara AS US$550 juta, dan Uni Eropa US$450 juta. Jepang memulai risetnya pada 1985. Untuk itu pemerintah Jepang, melalui Federasi Organisasi Ekonomi Jepang, Kaidanren, membentuk Expert Group on Nanotechnology sebagai motor penelitian nanoteknologi. AS mulai serius mengembangkan nanoteknologi di era Bill Clinton, yang tahun 2000 lalu mendirikan National Nanotechnology Initiative. Selain badan pemerintahan, perusahaan swasta juga serius mengadakan riset pengembangan nanoteknologi. IBM, misalnya, melalui IBM Zurich Research Laboratory yang dipimpin oleh Petter Yettiger dan Gerd Binning, sedang mengembangkan instrumen penyimpan data sebesar jarum nano dengan teknik scanning tunneling microscope. Dengan teknologi ini, IBM mampu menyimpan 25 juta halaman buku dalam alat penyimpanan yang ukurannya hanya sebesar perangko (bandingkan dengan hard disk yang ada saat ini). Prototipe alat penyimpan data ini akan dinamakan Millipede. Tak mau kalah, Intel Corporation pun mengembangkan prosesor yang memiliki kemampuan sepuluh kali lipat dibanding Pentium 4, yang rencananya dilepas ke pasar pada 2007. Bagaimana dengan Indonesia? Kita juga tak kalah. Adalah PT Dirgantara Indonesia, bekerja sama dengan Pusat Teknologi Elektronika Dirgantara dari Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa Nasional (LAPAN), merancang satelit nano yang dinamakan Indonesia Nano Satelit-1 (Inasat-1). Mochtar Riady dari Grup Lippo dan Prof. Yohanes Surya (pelopor Tim Olimpiade Fisika Indonesia) dan kawan-kasan juga telah mendirikan Center for Nanotechnology. Meski belum menyentuh hajat hidup orang banyak, minimal kita tidak kalah start. Perkembangan ke depan nanoteknologi membuat kita mampu memproduksi chip dengan ukuran lebih kecil, lebih kuat dan lebih efisien. Hal ini akan berdampak positif bagi perkembangan teknologi. Bahkan, kini sedang dikembangkan komputer quantum dengan nanoteknologi. Dalam bidang pertanian, dengan nanoteknologi, hasil rekayasa genetika tanaman akan lebih mudah dikontrol, sehingga tercipta produk pertanian yang unggul dengan harga murah. Dalam bidang pertahanan, pemerintah AS melalui Institute for Soldier Nanotechnologies of MIT tengah mengembangkan pakaian tempur pintar yang tipis dan ringan, yang dapat melindungi pemakainya dari terjangan peluru, senjata kimia serta radiasi. Bukan itu saja, baju pintar ini dapat mendeteksi bagian tubuh yang terluka dan mengobatinya. Kecanggihan terakhir, baju pintar ini dapat berubah warna sesuai kondisi sekitar bak bunglon. Dalam bidang industri, berbagai terobosan dapat dilakukan dengan nanoteknologi untuk menggantikan bahan baku industri yang kian langka. Jepang, misalnya, pada 1997 membuat proyek ultra baja untuk mengembangkan teknologi konservasi baja. Baja super ini dilaporkan memiliki kekuatan dua kali lipat dari baja biasa, sehingga pemakaiannya dapat lebih efisien. Hal ini dapat menjadi solusi bagi krisis baja yang melanda dunia beberapa bulan terakhir akibat melonjak tajamnya permintaan baja dari Cina. Banyak ilmuwan yang percaya bahwa nanoteknologi adalah teknologi masa depan, yang sebentar lagi akan terjadi. Dalam bukunya 10 Lessons From the Future : Tomorrow is A Matter of Choice, Make It Yours , Wolfgang Grulke menyatakan bahwa nanoteknologi akan berkembang sangat pesat, bahkan masyarakat umum sudah dapat merasakan manfaatnya pada 2007. Dengan kemampuan nanoteknologi yang dapat mengubah materi dari elemen paling dasar, yaitu atom, kita akan dapat menghasilkan banyak hal yang dulu hanya ada di angan-angan. Ada dua pertanyaan besar yang harus kita tanyakan kepada diri sendiri. Pertama, apakah kita akan menjadi pemain dalam perkembangan nanoteknologi, ataukah hanya sebagai penonton? Pilihan ada di tangan kita. Selama ini Indonesia selalu belajar dari negara maju. Tidakkah ada keinginan suatu saat kita menjadi guru? Kedua, apakah nanoteknologi ini akan membawa perbaikan standar hidup manusia, atau malah merusaknya? Teknologi ibarat pisau, bisa digunakan untuk kebaikan atau kejahatan. Nanoteknologi bisa menghasilkan produk pertanian yang berguna bagi pengentasan kemiskinan dan kelaparan. Namun, nanoteknologi juga dapat menghasilkan bahan kimia yang mematikan. Pilihan ada di tangan kita. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Clean water saves lives. Help make water safe for our children. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YNG3nB/VREMAA/E2hLAA/BRUplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> *************************************************************************** Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia *************************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Mohon Perhatian: 1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik) 2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari. 3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi 4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
