To support long-term national development, many authorities in charge start investing more in science disciplines than in social fields. Whereas this decision is seen as a strategic policy, I believe that it is impractical since all academic subjects are valuable and selective funding will create educational and social inequality.
All academic disciplines hold equal importance for the national development programs. While science-related subjects are crucial to foster national technological advancement, social sciences also contribute to the overall growth of a country in one way or another. For example, English language education programs help university students and researchers learn English, so they are able to comprehend high-quality international journal articles in any fields, including hard sciences, which are typically written in English. Therefore, this serves as proof that focusing educational investment solely on scientific fields is not only impractical, but also detrimental to the holistic national progress.
Moreover, reducing the budgets for social science subjects will create inequality in education and beyond. As academic programs other than science receive much smaller amount of funding from the government in charge, many educational institutions will struggle financially, resulting in reduced overall quality of their operations. Moreover, the graduates in social disciplines will likely to struggle to find a job with decent salary, widening the gaps in society. Therefore, this inequal investment will slow down national progress instead of speeding up its progress.
To sum up, larger share of investment on science fields is not feasible since national advancement relies on all disciplines. Additionally, it will also hinder the development programs due to the inequality in education and social sectors. Therefore, it is much more practical to give equal investment to all academic fields.