Microscopes before microchips: Why developing nations need basic science

As the United Nations marks the International Day of Science, Technology and Innovation for the South on 16 September 2025, a key question arises for developing nations: How should they build their future? 

It is tempting to see technology as the obvious answer; for countries facing urgent economic and social needs, investing in applied technology seems like the fastest path to modernisation in today's technology-dominated economy. 

This view, however, overlooks how progress truly happens. 

The modern world, with its smartphones, internet, advanced computers, and robotics, was not built on technology alone. It was built on a foundation of basic science, research driven purely by the desire to understand our world. 

For developing nations, investing in basic science may seem like a luxury, but in reality, it is the essential strategy for building a truly independent and prosperous future.

The appeal of a "technology-first" approach is strong. It promises quick fixes, modern infrastructure, and a fast lane into the global digital economy. But a country that only imports and uses technology created elsewhere is always playing catch-up. 

This path creates a nation of consumers, not creators, leaving its economic future dependent on the innovations of others. The risks are immense. Such a nation becomes vulnerable to the prices, patents, and supply chains controlled by other countries. 

More importantly, without its own scientific experts, a country cannot effectively adapt, improve, or maintain the technologies it buys. True progress means more than just using modern tools. It means understanding the scientific principles behind them and contributing to their development.

The history of technology is filled with proof that basic science comes first. The digital age is a perfect example. In 1947, physicists at Bell Labs were conducting basic research on how electrons move through semiconductor materials. 

They were not trying to invent a new product or launch a business. Their work was pure physics, an attempt to understand the world. Yet their curiosity-driven research led them to discover the transistor, the building block of every electronic device we use today. 

The global semiconductor industry, now worth more than half a trillion dollars, was born not from a plan to build better electronics, but from a commitment to fundamental science. This is just one of many examples showing that investment in basic research can yield economic returns far beyond any targeted technology program.

Likewise, the current revolution in artificial intelligence (AI) did not appear overnight. It is the result of over seventy years of foundational work. The field was pioneered in the 1950s not by software engineers, but by mathematicians like John McCarthy. 

The deep link between basic science and AI was exemplified again recently when the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton for discoveries that enabled modern machine learning. 

Hopfield, a physicist, used concepts from the physics of complex systems to understand how a network could learn and remember. This is a crucial lesson. The architecture of modern AI comes from deep scientific principles, not from clever coding or high-tech companies. Decades of patient investment in basic science are what made today's AI explosion possible.

The most important product of basic science is not a new gadget; it is a skilled population. A strong science education and research system creates a pipeline of critical thinkers, students, researchers, and engineers who can then drive innovation. These individuals have the deep understanding needed not only to create new technologies but also to adapt existing ones to solve local problems. 

Economic constraints may seem like a big hurdle limiting basic science research in developing countries. But looking back, nations like South Korea and China began their rise with relatively modest yet steady investment in science education and research. By building this foundation of human capital first, they transformed their economies from being technology importers to global technology leaders.

Countries in the Global South face unique challenges in areas like agriculture, public health, and climate change, problems that imported technologies are often not designed to solve. A local community of scientists and researchers is essential for developing homegrown solutions tailored to these specific needs. When a country invests in science, it empowers its people to innovate for themselves. This builds economic resilience and reduces reliance on other nations. 

For a country like Bangladesh, where interest in science education is declining, the stakes are high. Focusing only on practical skills is not enough. While technology can solve today's problems, a foundation in basic science gives a nation the power to solve the problems of tomorrow, ensuring it is not left behind in a rapidly changing world.

Consider Bangladesh's recent high-profile technological ventures, such as the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant and the Bangabandhu-1 satellite. These are monumental engineering feats that signal the nation's ambition. However, they also highlight the potential drawbacks of a technology-first approach. 

The design, construction, and launch of these projects have been almost entirely dependent on foreign partners and imported expertise. While this collaboration is necessary to kickstart such initiatives, it is not a sustainable model for long-term development. 

Without a robust domestic pool of nuclear physicists, materials scientists, and aerospace engineers, professionals nurtured by a strong basic science education system, the country will struggle to independently operate, maintain, and innovate upon this advanced infrastructure. To truly own its technological future, Bangladesh must invest in the fundamental scientific knowledge that will one day allow its own experts to lead such projects from conception to completion.

The path to sustainable development is not a shortcut paved with imported technology. It is a patient journey that begins in the classrooms and laboratories where basic science is explored. Technology without a deep understanding of science leads to fragile prosperity and lasting dependence. To move from being a consumer to an innovator, we must invest in our capacity to ask fundamental questions.

The goal cannot be to simply remain a "developing" country forever. To build a future of innovation, economic sovereignty, and true technological strength, we must embrace a bold vision - one that prioritises the microscope today to build the microchips of tomorrow.

Amio G Chowdhury is a PhD student at the University of Texas at Arlington.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.