To a large extent, the ruling dispensations are to blame, though fat pocket industries cannot be left blameless

A pall of gloom has set in the world of Indian Science, Technology, Agriculture and Medicine (STEAM) over the last two years or so. And it has nothing (not yet) to do with who runs the government. First an across-the-board cut of over 30 per cent of the allotted budget was imposed by the previous government, leading to last-minute dropping of projects and delays in existing ones. And the present government has neither restored the cut nor added anything yet. Going by indications, it might not improve significantly. We heard a decade ago that the budget for STEAM will improve from the then 0.8 per cent of GDP to over 2 per cent in a gradual manner. Yes, it did rise to almost 1 per cent but dropped back in real terms soon. Indian efforts in STEAM are fast losing steam. So is higher education.

To a large extent, the ruling dispensations are to blame, though fat pocket industries cannot be left blameless. Unlike in Europe, Japan or the US, private industries and/or industrialists here do not have foundations or similar entities that support research by others; they at best support in-house research and development. Thus, most of us have to depend entirely on the central and state governments for support. State governments support research more by lip service than lakhs of rupees.

The earlier government had in place not one but two scientific advisory panels, had STEAM experts members in the Planning Commission, and these bodies did bring about some changes and plans for action. We are hoping the present government too would seek similar or better advice and counsel, but it is yet to be. They have so far extolled past achievements (real and imagined) rather than explore tomorrow’s science.

More often than not, ministers declare that they will open more IITs, IIMs, AIIMSs and Central Universities and so forth, often in rural places with little or no academic contacts with peers, as often happens in cities. Politicians are particularly enamoured with the success of some of these elite institutes, and think they can do the same within a few years by allotting hundreds of acre and promising billions of rupees, which may or may not come. But, bricks and mortar do not an IIT make. Today, over 30 such institutions have mushroomed across the country, and most remain headless, and the heads of already existing institutions are asked to nurse, nurture and mentor the newbies — a bureaucratic double-whammy solution. Getting the right people and letting them loose to experiment is the trick, but such autonomy is anathema for the rulers. Expert committees meet and recommend what they consider as the right men/women for the job, but the minister dismisses the recommendation and offers the job to the person of his/her choice — a classic example of ‘he who pays calls the tune.’ And we want excellence!

As Professor Amartya Sen said recently: “Academic governance in India remains so deeply vulnerable to the opinions of the ruling government.” So true. Oxford is not run by David Brown, nor is Harvard by Obama. Domain expertise, independence in decision making and autonomy — three conditions extolled by experts as essential for success need to be guaranteed. This was how the original 5 IITs and 5 central universities gained their name and fame. This is how the Indian Institute of Science has remained an outstanding institution for over 100 years. Politicians, please keep out of these!

It is worse when you call the tune, but not even pay. Over the last couple of years, the allocated budget of the government R &D labs, and grants for research project, has been cut by as much as 35 per cent. Some labs have had to pay salaries for their staff from internal funds. Researchers go around with letters that have sanctioned sums of money as grants for their research projects, but the promised money has not come yet.

It is a marvel that despite all these, many scientists and academicians continue to perform well. I know of at least half a dozen youngsters who have published world class research publications very recently. Almost all of these are patentable and can bring wealth. A couple of them, given timely (indeed immediate) support, can be fine-tuned to generate potential treatment for the rampant viral disease swine flu if a targeted programme is launched with urgency and funded. They need help and hand-holding. The NIH model in the U.S. screens such publications and helps the authors get patents and allow licensing. We have two brilliant scientists heading the Department of Biotechnology and the Department of Science and Technology. I request them to look into this aspect of screening potential breakthroughs and assist the author in patenting and licensing, and launch a program, just as China did (and succeeded with the SARS virus).

Independent India was founded and has developed largely by making friends with science. And in doing so, it relied on the wisdom and commitment of some scientists and economists who thought big. The government respected their views and acted on them, without any major interference. Plans were made, money was budgeted and spent, and we have progressed. This trend has been good to us, but in recent times this is being given the go by. The science academies have played positive roles and continue to do so, by mentoring young researchers, offering academic advice, discussing and debating with the relevant ministers. What we need is to continue to have spokespersons, even “lobbyists” as the U.S. term has it, academies and professional societies interacting with government assert themselves and taking on a role of advocacy. In such absence the budget for STEAM will continue to be sub-optimal. Mr Jaitley, continue to make friends with science and fund it. Mere 0.8 per cent of GDP will not do. Make it 2 per cent and make it in India. Tabee to Acche Din Aayenge.

dbala@lvpei.org