100 Years of Indian Science Congress

The Fate of Scientific Enterprise as Indian Science Congress turns 100:  Reported by FORBES 

 

First Indian Science Congress, 1914

1. Keep open house discussions on big science projects/themes: If at all the Congress is to be the place to make policy announcements, then make it also the place where its rationale is discussed. Almost every policy today is inseparable from technicalities – energy, healthcare, education, defense, communication, etc. Choose big subjects, get the most relevant and renowned people in the field to present the most updated data and discussion. For instance, take one space mission or a new technical area (say, the cryogenic stages of GSLV which have gone through ups and downs or, why ISRO needs cross fertilization with the industry), get the people working on it to discuss the challenges and scope of these programs. Similarly, it could be about nuclear power (After protests in all corners of the country, the least nuclear scientists can do is have town hall meetings on these subjects), shale gas exploration or new solar energy strategy. 

2. Feed science/tech into evidence-based policy making: Science is supposed to advice public policy. But is that advice based on evidence today? Perhaps sometimes, but not always. Let me cite an example. The Toronto-based epidemiologist, Prabhat Jha has been long running this research called Million Death Study and using data from the first 250,000 deaths, his team has showed that 1 million people are dying in India from smoking related diseases. It forced the govt to step up the gas on using warning labels on tobacco products. It also showed 100,000 people were dying from AIDS, nearly a quarter of the number that UN was advocating. Resources have been (or are being) reallocated as HIV treatment is expensive. Similarly, snakebite deaths amount to 50,000, the total number for worldwide cases according to the WHO, forcing government and primary health care centres to focus on stocking venom and other necessary medicines.

3. Open up govt data with immediate effect: There’s a worldwide trend to make govt data available online in open formats and licenses that allow people to use it freely. India too made its beginning. But even a few months after the beta launch of the India data portal, it looks almost devoid of any useful data. While a long list of suggestions from users is already up there, it’d be worth anybody’s while if all ministries and public institutions worked in a coordinated manner to make their data available. Opportunities are particularly big for entrepreneurs in healthcare, energy, urban planning, and other natural resources. As Vijay Chandru, founder-chairman of bio-informatics company Strand Life Sciences says, it is the “Y2K moment” for companies in India.

4. No separate Academy for young scientists and engineers: The PM last year said a proposal has been mooted for a separate Academy for the young. To my mind, that would create wider divides. Instead, give 40 percent seats in the existing Academies to scientists/engineers under 40. Besides removing some deadwood, it’d infuse energy in the remaining members who also need to change with time, especially now when nobody retires; people move from one role to another.

5. If ISC cannot reinvent or reform itself, it should shut shop, just end: It serves no academic or practical purpose. And like all legacies, is hijacked by governmental science.

On Jan 3, 1947, Jawaharlal Nehru, who was then a member of the Interim Government and was to become the PM eight months later, had said:  “Governments normally are very slow and the only thing that moves them is some immediate outcry which affects their future indirectly. Therefore, I should discourage among the scientists a reliance always on what Government may or may not do.” Was Nehru prescient or intuitive?
When I asked Balaram whether he is optimistic about the fate of scientific enterprise in India or pessimistic, his response was neutral: “Matters take care of themselves over time, that’s how it happens in biology…”

Science in India: Reflections on the Anniversary of a Congress: Editorial by P. Balaram in Current Science 

(http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/103/11/1255.pdf)

---------------------------------------------------------------

Left, Right, Centre: Whirlwind on STI Policy 2013 (Media Coverage)

This 2005/2007 Report strongly urges US to look to STEM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics) for tackling global challenges, within and outside its boundary...when India will learn from these kind of reports?

A) 2020 vision: PM releases Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, says India will be among top 5 global scientific powers

India today unveiled a new science policy that lays greater thrust on innovation, establishing research institutes and encourage women scientists with an aim to position itself among the top five scientific powers in the world by 2020.

The Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy, 2013 also speaks of modifying the intellectual property regime to provide for marching rights for social good when supported by public funds and co-sharing of patents generated in the public private partnership mode.

Unveiling the STI policy, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said it aspires to position India among the top five global scientific powers by 2020.

"It is an ambitious goal," he said, adding the policy also aims at producing and nurturing talent in science, to stimulate research in universities, to develop young leaders in the field of science and to reward performance.

It also seeks to create a policy environment for greater private sector participation in research and innovation and to forge international alliances and collaborations to meet the national agenda, he said.

The policy also talks of raising gross expenditure in R&D to two per cent of GDP from the current one per cent in this decade by encouraging enhanced private sector contribution.

"The policy is truly aspirational and seeks to accelerate the pace of discovery and delivery of science-led solutions for faster, sustainable and inclusive growth," Science and Technology Minister S Jaipal Reddy said.

He dubbed the policy as a "rare and resounding expression of collective will and wisdom of the Indian scientific community that is at once a product of and a clarion call of the scientific community".

The document is a revision of the 2003 policy which sought to bring science and technology together and emphasised on the need for higher investment into R&D to address national problems.

The (STI) policy also seeks to trigger an ecosystem for innovative abilities to flourish by leveraging partnerships among diverse stakeholders and by encouraging and facilitating enterprises to invest in innovations.

The aim of the policy is to accelerate the pace of discovery, diffusion and delivery of science-led solutions for serving the aspirational goals of India for faster, sustainable and inclusive growth.

The key features of the STI Policy 2013 include making careers in science, research and innovation attractive, establishing world-class infrastructure for R&D for gaining global leadership in some select frontier areas of science.

The policy also includes linking contributions of science, research and innovation system with the inclusive economic growth agenda and combining priorities of excellence and relevance.

It also stresses on creating an environment for enhanced private sector participation in R&D, enabling conversion of R&D outputs into societal and commercial applications by replicating successful models as well as establishing of new public-private partnership structures.

India first unveiled its Scientific Policy Resolution in 1958 which resolved to "foster, promote and sustain" the cultivation of science and scientific research in all its aspects.

The Technology Policy Statement of 1983 focused on the need to attain technological competence and self reliance.

Officials said in today's world, innovation was no longer a mere appendage to S&T but has assumed centre stage in its own right in the development of countries around the world.

Inculcate rational thinking among people: PM to scientists

In a first, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today chaired a panel discussion of eminent scientists where he asked them to collectively ensure that science-led innovation would pave the way for the rise of India.

Initiating the discussion on 'Science for Shaping the Future of India', he also asked scientists to take up the task of inculcating rational thinking among the ordinary people.

"The scientific community will also need to introspect whether our society is geared to making full use of the offerings of science," he told the panel comprising Principal Scientific Adviser R Chidambaram, eminent agriculture scientist M S Swaminathan and Britain's Chief Scientific Adviser John Beddington.

Observing that every generation of scientists in every country has fought existing prejudices and convictions, Singh said, "Inculcating rational thinking among the ordinary people is a task that scientists, from their vantage point, should take upon themselves as a sacred mission."

He said the accretion of knowledge had accelerated in recent times throwing up exciting possibilities.

"This has also opened up the question of whether our existing scientific paradigms are adequate to meet the challenges of future or whether we need new paradigms."

Singh said scientists need to be visionaries and offer tomorrow's solution to tomorrow's challenges.

"How do we manage the resource needs of the projected population of the world in 2035? How do we meet the needs of food and nutrition, energy and environment, water and sanitation and affordable healthcare? These are among the big questions that the scientists should apply themselves to," Singh said.

Participating in the discussion, Swaminathan said there was a growing degree of divergence between public perception and science.

He citied the recent controversies over genetically-modified organisms and the agitation over safety aspects of nuclear power, particularly in the aftermath of the Fukushima incident.

"It is very important to bridge the growing gap of perception between science and the society," he said.

Swaminathan referred to a committee on public understanding of science of the Royal Society of London that encourages scientists to take up public outreach activities about their research.

Beddington cautioned that the future, unlike the past, would pose enormous problems for fuel and water security, agriculture production as farmers would not be able to rely solely on weather patterns.

"We have to be thinking about meeting these challenges," he said.

Chidambaram made a strong pitch for participation of Indian scientists in mega-science projects and called for greater investments in establishing research facilities.

He also wanted a stronger interface between the academic institutions and the industry.

Chidambaram, a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, also reiterated the need for nuclear power to meet the growing energy needs of the country.

Science and Technology Minister S Jaipal Reddy wanted the scientists to develop solutions to the problems faced by the poor of the country.

He said innovation should focus on cheap and practical solutions which were appropriate for India's needs.

B) Science policy: Good intention, but work ahead

Not every attempt, however serious it may be, can result in a success. But that cannot be a reason not to make the attempt or to help someone in making that attempt. Not that the science and technology establishment in the government did not realise this earlier, but it is only now that it has decided to take the risks and back those who need help in taking these risks. The decision to establish a ‘Risky Idea Fund’ and promote a mechanism like ‘Small Idea Small Money’ are healthy and refreshing initiatives outlined in the new science policy — Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy — unveiled by the government last week.

Policy documents are never short on pious declarations or new ideas. It is their translation into action that is generally lacking. Still the STI policy is promising because it takes a new leap of faith. Apart from the near-complete emphasis on promoting innovation — especially innovation that will lead to making life easier for the disadvantaged and disabled — the policy realises new ground realities and indicates that the government is ready to grapple with them.

Treating research and development activity in the private sector at par with public institutions as far as availing of public funds is concerned is again an idea that shows a change in mindset. And here the intent is not to fund big companies and organisations but the little start-ups or individuals who require small seed money to try to translate their innovative ideas into successful business. The fabled stories of garage-stores growing into awe-inspiring MNCs might still be some distance away from being replicated, but at least the government would not be faulted for not trying.

By announcing its intent, the government has completed the easier part. The more difficult part would be to fulfil the promises made in the policy document. As some scientists point out, a change in mindset need not wait for a policy to be unveiled. The painstakingly compiled database of grassroots innovations at the National Innovation Foundation or the database of traditional knowledge, both efforts of government agencies themselves, have thousands of ideas that have the potential of commercial success, if only some support is provided. An overwhelming number of them are innovations which are also socially “inclusive”, a stated objective of the policy. The waiting game should be over.

(Amitabh is a Senior Assistant Editor based in Delhi) 

C) Getting serious about science

Releasing the "Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2013" at the centenary session of the Indian Science Congress in Kolkata last week, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declared that it was intended to "position India among the top five global scientific powers by the year 2020."

India has a new science policy. Releasing the “Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2013” at the centenary session of the Indian Science Congress in Kolkata last week, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declared that it was intended to “position India among the top five global scientific powers by the year 2020.” It bears recalling that in 1958 both Houses of Parliament adopted a “Scientific Policy Resolution” which, in elegant prose, underscored the importance of science and technology for a developing nation. The government would, the resolution said, “foster, promote, and sustain, by all appropriate means, the cultivation of science and scientific research in all its aspects — pure, applied, and educational.” Subsequent science policies announced by later governments have essentially tweaked the 1958 resolution. Indira Gandhi’s 1983 policy emphasised self-reliance while the 2003 policy announced by Atal Bihari Vajpayee sought to meet the challenges posed by globalisation.

There has been a growing sense of India falling behind in the race to use its scientific capabilities and of China powering ahead. “We produce more science than before, but several more ambitious countries like China and South Korea have outpaced us,” lamented the Science Advisory Council to the Prime Minister in a 2010 report titled “India as a global leader in science.” China’s investment in research and development has been shooting up at 20 per cent annually over the past 10 years. As a result, that country is currently spending about 1.7 per cent of its GDP on R&D and, in absolute terms, is being outspent only by the U.S. India’s R&D spending, on the other hand, has yet to rise above one per cent of its GDP. As in the 2003 policy, the new science policy too wants to boost the country’s research spending to two per cent of GDP with greater private sector R&D investment. With greater R&D inputs, the country’s share of global trade in high technology products is to be doubled from the current level of around eight per cent. Having a new policy makes sense only if it spurs change; otherwise it is just an exercise in mouthing platitudes. Well-focused government initiatives are needed in a number of areas, rather than just some piecemeal measures, to flesh out the laudable objectives laid out in the science policy. The domestic market must, for instance, be leveraged, such as through appropriate government procurement policies, to allow indigenous technology to flourish and compete internationally. That’s something China has done with remarkable success. Will the Indian government be able to match its words with action?

D) New Science, Technology & Innovation Policy: from Peoples Democracy

PRIME Minister Dr Manmohan Singh last week unveiled a new Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (henceforth STI for short) at the centenary-year Indian Science Congress in Kolkata. The STI Policy is conceived as the next important step up the ladder of S&T based development, suited to the demands and requirements of the early decades of the 21st century. STI seeks to build upon the three earlier major S&T policies namely the Scientific Policy Resolution adopted by parliament in 1958, an umbrella statement proclaiming India’s intention to promote and harness science for the nation’s development and modernisation, the Technology Policy Statement (1983) focusing on development of S&T self-reliance, and the S&T Policy of 2003 announced by the NDA government which stressed the need to integrate S&T research with socio-economic priorities and to create an innovation system.

STI argues that innovation is the key to national advancement in the present era but has not been accorded due importance as an instrument of policy, a lacuna which STI specifically addresses. With India having declared 2010-2020 as the Decade of Innovation, and having established a National Innovation Council, STI seeks to provide the necessary policy framework to position STI as “central to national development” and puts forward a new perspective towards this end, namely that whereas science, technology and innovation could always be promoted separately, only the integrated approach of STI will provide the desired multiplication effect to meet national challenges and inclusive growth, and enable harnessing of the country’s resources, strengths and capabilities.

No one will have any major complaints with any of this. The role of innovation in the contemporary technology intensive, dynamic and globalised economy is well-known, and the need for foregrounding innovation and integrating it with other developmental policy is also widely accepted. The significance of the STI policy for India will not, however, lie in the novelty of the idea, but in how the desired outcomes are proposed to be achieved. And here the STI Policy document (www.dst.gov.in/sti-policy-eng.pdf) falls woefully short. In the absence of an analytical account of past achievements and current gaps, strengths and weaknesses, and implementation strategies and mechanisms, we are left with a policy that is high on rhetoric and intentions but weak in terms of ground realities and addressing implementation and monitoring issues. Regrettably therefore, as has so often been the case in India with so many policies, and particularly so in S&T, chances are that once again there will be a wide gap between targets and performance.          

NO REVIEW OR ANALYSIS

The most serious weakness of the STI Policy is that it does not present at least a synoptic assessment or review of the achievements and shortfalls with respect to the three previous S&T Policies, and the reasons for the same. This is not finding fault for the sake of it, but points to a major flaw: if one does not know why certain goals were or were not achieved earlier, how are goals for the future to be set and strategies delineated in a manner so as to overcome weaknesses and build on strengths? Several new policy documents especially in recent decades have followed a trend of quite intensive self-critical analysis even if the new policies enunciated may not fully address the problems identified. But STI has not even ventured that far.

In the case of S&T Policy in India, many scholarly studies over the years have highlighted structural weaknesses in mostly State run research institutions, the university system and in industry which have stood in the way of quality research and innovation, or even the necessary enhancement of capabilities and the building of an environment that would encourage and support them. Shortage and low motivation of human resources in basic research expected to be conducted in a few academic and specialist research institutions, exacerbated by long-term dwindling of funding and support, is by now well recognised, as is the impact that low performance in basic research will have on applied science, technology and innovation. Separation of research streams and corresponding support systems into industrial research in national laboratories and basic or some applied research in universities and select centres of S&T excellence is also known to have contributed to this problem, while research in universities including the prestigious IITs has dwindled substantially to the extent they are largely confined to teaching.

STI sets targets to improve the caliber of Indian science publications and of papers published by Indian scientists, tacitly acknowledging their current low levels but putting a spin on this by saying performance has risen in the recent past and will be raised under STI. India’s share in global science publications may well have risen from 1.8 per cent in 2001 to 3.5 per cent in 2011 but, as STI admits, only 2.5 per cent of Indian publications figure in the top 1 per cent of impact-making journals in the world. The target of doubling the former and quadrupling the latter share may be laudable, but the bigger question is, will this truly signify a qualitative improvement in Indian science and a major shift? While the STI document enumerates the usual platitudes about fostering excellence and relevance in Indian science research, and encouraging collaborative research and participation in international “big science” projects, there is no indication of how future practices will differ from current ones.

Unfortunately what the STI document does not mention, analyse or confront is that large segments of the scientific research and university system in India today verge on the moribund. Exhortations and carrot-and-stick reward systems, as evidenced by rising numbers of papers published or patents filed, will only go so far. Most commentators would agree that, unless there are fundamental changes in both what is done and how it is done, rising numbers might only mean that the system is being gamed better, and that higher quantities of research output might not translate into higher quality of S&T research in India. A culture of innovation is a far cry, and would call for completely different institutional structures and autonomy, organisational systems and behaviour, scale and manner of research funding, and human resource development and management, than either what is prevalent or what the STI document suggests. To understand and correct the malaise of today, and open up to new horizons tomorrow, it will be necessary to examine structural problems facing Indian science, research institutions, universities and industry. STI has only kicked this can of worms down the road.

MISTAKEN RELIANCE ON PRIVATE SECTOR      

Perhaps due to the lack of an introspective and analytical appraisal, there is a tendency in STI to prescribe ab initio solutions, and also considerable confusion as to goals and what kinds of policies are required for them.

The most glaring of such disconnects is regarding funding. Accepting that India’s expenditure of 1per cent of its GDP on R&D, much lower than other developing countries and less than 2.5 per cent of global R&D expenditure, is highly inadequate, STI proposes to increase this to 2 per cent which STI itself admits is a very old dream! It seems destined to remain one! Because STI recommends that this increase in R&D expenditure come from the private sector! This would be laughable were it not so filled with dangerous consequences.

Again, many studies have shown that the track record of the Indian private sector in R&D and research expenditure has been very poor with a very few notable exceptions. All manner of government incentives, including 135 per cent tax relief, have not nudged corporates to invest in research. Reasons are not far to seek. Even large Indian corporations find it easier to enter into collaborations, or import or buy technologies, or even to take over foreign firms, all of which liberalisation has made simpler, than to be innovative and develop new products and technologies. Even the much acclaimed IT sector can boast of very few software products even while it performs vast quantities of back-office tasks for international corporations or coding for globally branded software developers. Indian corporations are content to be quite low down in the international division of labour even in manufacturing, leave alone in technology development and science research. Indian industry needs major re-orientation to develop self-reliant capabilities and master technologies, to leapfrog stages of technology development through scientific research, and to reach for global competitiveness by drawing on the strengths of the domestic market which must be expanded radically by reducing poverty and boosting mass purchasing power as China has done. But all this will call for a different vision of development, of Indian industry, and of political economy.

Saying that the additional R&D investment required will be generated through the private sector is tantamount to STI declaring that the State will not raise its R&D expenditure. The government of the day may be enamoured of the private sector and PPP may be the flavour of the month. But history tells us that no country, no matter how devoted to the capitalist path, has developed without massive State investment in R&D. If India has to depend on private sector funding of R&D to catapult the country into the 5th rank in global science as the STI document proclaims, the nation is in for sharp disappointment and S&T in India will continue to languish.

CONFLICTING GOALS

AND POLICIES

The policy document repeatedly emphasises that both economic growth and social good will be pursued through STI, and even speaks of the need to address the “pressing problems of energy and environment, food and nutrition, water and sanitation, habitat, affordable health care and skill building and unemployment”. Indeed, perhaps carried away with its own rhetoric, the policy document goes so far as to claim that “science, technology and innovation for the people is the new paradigm of the Indian STI enterprise.”   

There are two sets of problems here, firstly whether one can or should at all expect “big science” and especially private sector funded R&D to directly deliver social good, and secondly the role of science, technology and innovation in tackling social sector problems. STI appears to be riding two horses at once in terms of goals, global competitiveness and the developmental deficit within India, without recognising and addressing the quite different approaches and instrumentalities required for each.

Given the reluctance of Indian corporates to invest in R&D even in their own evident long-term self-interest, it is clearly unrealistic to expect private sector funded R&D to tackle problems of societal development. And even if they did, to believe that creation of economic wealth through STI will also result in generation of social good is only another form of the trickle-down theory.  Also, to hold that a generalised strengthening or revitalisation of Indian science oriented to climbing higher up the global innovation chain and economic order will somehow also result in improved technologies for societal development is a misunderstanding of how science works and how innovation takes place.

Indeed it is incorrect to put the burden of solution to societal problems on the shoulders of science and technology when, in fact, these issues fall squarely under the ambit of State social policy. Half the population of India suffers on all these counts not because of shortage of investment in R&D, or because of lack of S&T based solutions. If that were so, why does India lag behind other South Asian or even many Sub-Saharan countries on all these counts? S&T can undoubtedly make a significant contribution to these issues but only within a larger framework of social policy and distributive justice. The STI document correctly points to “the gaps between the STI system and the socio-economic sectors,” but to bridge these gaps will require far more than “developing a symbiotic relationship with economic and other policies.” It will need transforming these policies and a total overhaul of how innovation is supported and done in both governmental and non-governmental research institutions and universities, and how developmental delivery systems are restructured within a reoriented policy frame.  This requires a separate dialogue and the STI document does not even begin to discuss the complex issues involved.

START OF A

DIALOGUE       

It would be churlish not to acknowledge that the STI document contains several good ideas. Its central point about the need to emphasise innovation, and therefore the need to revamp Indian S&T so as to develop a creative culture and research eco-system, is a good one. The goals of raising the quality of Indian S&T, enhancing global competitiveness and generating innovative means to help tackle the gigantic developmental deficit of half the population, are laudable. Identifying select frontier areas of science to which extra attention could be paid, seeding high-risk S&T based innovations, enhanced Indian participation in global science projects, are all worth pursuing. But the STI policy does not come together as a whole, and the pathway to achieving the goals is unclear.  

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of STI which promises a “new paradigm” is that it follows the traditional paradigm of top-down policy formulation by a few wise men with everybody expected to pay biblical respect to each pronouncement. In fact, this very feature underscores much that is wrong with the S&T establishment in the country today, a paternalistic top-heavy bureaucratic structure in which creative thinking and contributions from peers are undervalued, dismissed or simply not encouraged. Any simple how-to book would tell you that this is precisely how innovation does NOT take place.

A beginning of new ways of working in Indian S&T could have been made with this policy by formulating it through a wide-ranging consultative process involving all stakeholders and taking on board the genuine concerns and the thoughtful suggestions that are sure to emerge. The STI document rightly points to the need for incentives in research and academic institutions to stimulate innovation, but in the past this has always been taken to mean more money. Better pay and benefits are undoubtedly welcome but a conducive and encouraging atmosphere, respect of peers, freedom to explore, and guidance rather than dictates of seniors are major constituents of a research and innovation eco-system.

If the government is serious about the STI policy and about bringing about such a transformation in Indian S&T, the present document should not be taken as cast in stone, but as an initiation of a longer dialogue on S&T policy in India and as itself marking a departure from the old ways of doing tings. Through widespread consultations, with stakeholders beyond the scientific community if developmental concerns are indeed to be taken on board, this document could go through many iterations leading to a new policy.
 

---------------------------------------------------------

From Grassroots to Global Innovation: Shifting language of CREATIVITY !!!

Ahmedabad Declaration: Second International Conference on Creativity and Innovation at Grassroots (7-8 December 2012, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India)

===================================================================

Grassroots innovations evolve in response to local problems but not always the ones faced by the innovators themselves. Many times, third party problems inspire the innovators to attempt solutions. Thus, these unaided, self-triggered and self-inspired solutions underlie the pursuit of inclusive development by the Honey Bee Network during the last twenty-four years. The International Conference on Creativity and Innovation at Grassroots provided a platform to scholars, activists, teachers, innovators, entrepreneurs, investors and other stakeholders including policy makers both from India and abroad to identify specific milestones that the Network should pursue in the coming decades. The Tianjin Declaration in 2008 had stressed

"Grassroots scientists and technologists have to be enabled to articulate 

                 their excellence, experimental and conservation ethics and educational pedagogies for 

                   achieving equitable, empathetic and efficient allocation of resources and opportunities in 

                  society. Incubation of grassroots innovations and outstanding traditional knowledge in a   

                 distributed, decentralized and social democratic manner provides an opportunity to address global concern for providing solutions to persistent social problems."

The concern for inclusive development has become stronger in the recent times, so has the need for open innovation platforms. Even the formal sector is recognizing that new solutions cannot always emerge from within organizations. The need for recognising, respecting and rewarding creativity in the informal sector has been recognized much more in the last five years. Thus, incentivising various stakeholders such as youth and institutional scientists to engage with individual and community innovators in the informal sector was emphasized strongly in this conference. The willingness of innovators to share their knowledge generously and without the expectation of much reciprocity was also articulated equally strongly. The dialectics of generosity and unfair exchange as well as the need for reciprocity and a lack of attribution reverberated all through the conference. Scientists working on validation of and value addition in grassroots innovations must be encouraged to share the summary of their findings in an easily comprehensible manner with the innovators and knowledge providers in their local language. Several of the recommendations involve use of ICT infrastructure. However, given the digital divide, not many grassroots innovators may be able to use these facilities without some institutional help. The fact that many innovators solve problems without being aware of scientific concepts underlying their ideas means that the awareness about scientific temperament and methodology needs to be increased. Even otherwise, the knowledge about scientific approaches might make the innovative pursuits more efficient. However, without practicing the ethical values underlying the philosophy of the Honey Bee Network, the efficiency of such pursuits will be short-lived.

The conference participants reached a consensus that future strategies for empowering grassroots innovators will have to be more entrepreneurial, collaborative and open in nature. To ensure that opportunities for technological, educational, cultural and institutional innovators at grassroots are expanded meaningfully, the 

Ahmedabad Declaration endorses the following:
1) Incentives
2) Dissemination
3) Institution Building and Open Innovation
4) Youth and Education
5) Cultural Creativity
6) Horizontal Supply Chain and Logistics Management

For details refer to: http://iccig.wordpress.com/
Video: http://www.ted.com/talks/anil_gupta_india_s_hidden_hotbeds_of_invention.html 

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/111225/BusinessTimes/bt14.html

=========================================

Draft NATIONAL PHARMACEUTICALS PRICING POLICY, 2011 approved by Union Cabinet : All stakeholders unhappy ---Debates galore !!!

Draft NATIONAL PHARMACEUTICALS PRICING POLICY, 2011 aimed at ensuring access of essential medicines was approved recently by Union Cabinet . It remains to be seen, whether this policy initiative which was received by both industry and civil society with much caution and skepticism, actually translates in benefits to patients, consumers vis-a-vis interests of manufacturers.

This comes in the backdrop of Report of the Task Force to Explore Options Other than Price Control for achieving the objective making available life-saving drugs at reasonable prices . This Task Force recommended that price regulation should be on the basis of ‘Essentiality’ of the drug and it should be applied only to formulations and not to upstream products, such as bulk drugs. Essential medicines are those that satisfy the priority health care needs of the population and are selected with due regard to disease prevalence, evidence on efficacy and safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness. An essential medicines list is a list of minimum medicines that a country should have, so as to be able to take care of the health needs of a majority of its population. If you were short of resources, you could at least stock these in sufficient quantities and at affordable rates. 

Source: http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/es/d/Js2296e/2.html

Report of this Task Force also maintained that, "No effort should be made to impose a uniform price, and only a ceiling price should be indicated. The ceiling price of essential drugs should normally not be based on cost of production but on readily monitorable market based benchmarks. Other drugs falling into selected therapeutic categories should be brought under a comprehensive price monitoring system with mandatory price negotiations system, if necessary.A process of active promotion of generic drugs should be put in place including mandatory debranding for selected drugs. Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs) involved in the manufacture of drugs should be revived where possible and used as key strategic interventions for addressing both price and availability issues. The drug regulator must maintain a data base of brands and their compositions and no change should be permitted in the composition of a given brand."

WHO Framework for Medicine Pricing and Financing

Under the proposed policy, the ministry has moved away from the existing economic/market share principle-based criteria of price fixation to “essentiality” based price control. This change of criteria was warranted by an eight-year directive from the Supreme Court, which had asked the central government to formulate a medicine price control mechanism to cover all essential drugs. (Read here)

The proposal of NPPP 2011 to regulate prices of all the 348 drugs in the NLEM 2011, though paved with good intentions, has inbuilt ways to escape from price regulation. A list that is the basis for price regulation needs to cover all these 800-1,000 molecules. Therefore the NLEM 2011 with 348 molecules will defeat the purpose of price regulation. 

Background of New Policy:

The control over prices was on the basis of the cost of production with allowance being given to post-production expenses. Later around Yr 2000 when FDI norms in pharma sector were brought at the level of automatic route raising the limit to 100%. All drugs where unit price is Rs. 2 were excluded from the ambit of price control. There were also exemptions to the drugs developed through indigenous R&D. , new delivery systems etc. Twin challenge of ensuring industrial growth and ensuring public health is at loggerheads with shifting and interchanging priorities in the whirlwind of debate over new pricing policy in the context of details mentioned above.

Towards Practical applications of the essential medicines concept: How ? 

• Basic and in-service training of health care providers
• Public-sector procurement and distribution
• Medicine benefits as part of health insurance
• Drug donations and international aid
• Monitoring systems on availability and pricing
• Public education.

Facts: 

a) Directory of Pharmaceutical Units in India- http://nppaindia.nic.in/directory-nppa.pdf

b) List of Essential Medicine: http://pharmaceuticals.gov.in/NLEM.pdf

c) Medicine price information methodology by WHO: http://www.who.int/medicines/areas/access/ecofin/en/index.html

d) Mandate of Dept. of Pharmaceuticals: 

---> Promotion and co-ordination of basic, applied and other research in areas related to the
Pharmaceuticals sector.

---> Development of infrastructure, manpower and skills for the Pharmaceuticals sector and
management of related information.

---> Education and training including high end research and grant of fellowships in India and
abroad, exchange of information and technical guidance on all matters relating to pharmaceutical sector.

---> Promotion of public – private – partnership in pharmaceutical related areas.

---> International cooperation in pharmaceutical research, including work related to international conferences in related areas in India and abroad.

---> Inter-sectoral coordination including coordination between organizations and institutes under the Central and State Governments in areas related to the subjects entrusted to the Department.

---> Technical support for dealing with national hazards in pharmaceutical sector.

---> All matters relating to National Pharmaceuticals Pricing Authority including related functions of price control/monitoring.

---> All matters relating to National Institutes for Pharmaceuticals Education and Research
(NIPERs).

---> Planning, development and control of; and assistance to, all industries dealt with by the
Department.

--------------------------------------------------------

Draft of The Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Government of India New Delhi January, 2013 released...

 

Science in Shaping the Future of an Aspiring India

Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) have emerged as the major drivers of

socio- economic development globally. India of the 21st century is an aspiring

country. Faster, sustainable and inclusive growth is her aspiration. Science,

Technology and Innovation leading to applications of products of Research and

Development will need to play defining roles. The large demographic dividend

and talent pool of the country offer unique opportunities the National STI

enterprise for earning for itself a central position in national development though

its excellence, relevance and performance.

What is innovation?

Scientific research converts money into knowledge and innovation converts

knowledge into wealth. Innovation is more than mere conversion of knowledge

into a workable technology. It implies an S&T-led solution that is successfully

deployed in the economy or society. India has, hitherto accorded little

importance to this aspect. There is now an urgent need to invigorate this aspect

of the national STI enterprise.

Changing Phases of National Policies in S&T

India’s Scientific Policy Resolution (SPR) of 1958, a pace setter in the world,

remains valid even today. The SPR resolved to “foster, promote and sustain” the

“cultivation of science and scientific research in all its aspects”. Technology was

then assumed to flow from the country’s established science infrastructure. The

SPR also emphasized the use of the scientific approach in all activities of the

nation. The Technology Policy Statement (TPS) of 1983, enunciated at a time of

constraints on import of technology, emphasized the need to attain technological

competence and self-reliance. Several of its statements were converted into

action. The Science and Technology Policy (STP) of 2003 brought science and

technology (S&T) together. It emphasized the need for investment into R&D to

address national problems. It called for integrating programmes of socioeconomic

sectors with the national R&D system. It also articulated the need for

technological innovation and creation of a national innovation system. The world

has changed vastly since then in all spheres of human activity

Why another policy?

Today innovation is no longer a mere appendage to science and technology but

has assumed centre stage in the developmental goals of countries around the

world. Vertical integration of all dimensions of STI into the socio-economic

processes seems the way forward in the modern world. New paradigms of

innovation have emerged and systems that foster innovation are not universal.

They have become country and context specific. The Prime Minister of India, at

the Indian Science Congress-2010 declared 2010-20 as the “Decade of

Innovations” and formed the National Innovation Council. The Prime Minister

and Minister of Science & Technology declared at the 99th Science Congress the

bringing forth of a policy that develops the synergy between science, technology

and innovation. The STI Policy 2013 is in furtherance of the declaration and aims

to bring fresh perspectives to bear on innovation in the changing context. The

policy thus seeks to focus on both people for science and science for people and

combine the benefits of excellence and relevance.

Policy for Science and Science Policy for Development: A New Paradigm

Science, research and innovation can exist separately on their own in

disconnected spaces. But there are synergistic linkages. India’s global

competitiveness will be determined by the extent to which the STI enterprise

integrates vertically and is able to create social good and economic good through

innovation. Innovative structural mechanisms and models will thus need to be

evolved to balance the priorities and develop interconnections of the three

sectors.

India’s STI system needs to deliver solutions to address the pressing national

challenges of energy and food security, nutrition, affordable health care,

environment, water and sanitation and above all employment .Thus discovery

and solution dimensions of science and technology need to play major roles in

shaping the future of the country. “Science and technology for the people” will be

the new paradigm of the Indian STI enterprise. Indian society must emerge as

the major stake holder for the national STI system.

India’s STI-led developmental efforts should thus aim at faster, inclusive and

sustainable growth. While global competitiveness in trade would call for high technology

inputs, inclusive growth would need to ensure access, availability

and affordability of solutions to as large a population as possible. India needs

‘inclusive innovation’. The policy will thus drive both investment in science and

investment of science-led technology and innovation in agriculture,

manufacturing and services that lead to socio-economic benefits to a wide cross

section of society. Emphasis will be laid on bridging the gaps between

knowledge and the economic sectors. The STI policy would develop symbiotic

relationship with economic and other policies.

Capturing aspirations

The key elements of the STI policy will be:

_ Promoting proliferation of scientific temper amongst all sections of society.

_ Enhancing skill for applications of science among the young from all social

strata

_ Making careers in science, research and innovation attractive to the brightest.

_ Establishing world class R&D infrastructure for gaining global leadership in

some select frontier areas of science.

_ Positioning India among the top five global scientific powers by 2020.

_ Linking contributions of science, research and innovation system with

inclusive economic growth agenda and combine priorities of excellence with

relevance

_ Migrating R&D outputs into commercial applications by replicating hitherto

successful models as well as establishment of new structures.

_ Facilitating S&T-based high-risk innovations. through new mechanisms

_ Triggering changes in the mindset and value systems to recognize, respect

and reward performances which create wealth from S&T derived knowledge.

Investment in Research and Development

Global investments in science, technology and innovation are estimated at $1.2

trillion as of 2009. India’s R&D investment is less than 2.5% of the global

investments. India’s R&D investment has been under 1% of the GDP. Increasing

Gross Expenditure in Research and Development (GERD) to 2% of the GDP has

been a national goal for some time. Achieving this in the next five years is

realizable provided the private sector matches India’s public investment and the

ratio of public to private sector investments in R&D changes from the current 3:1

to 1:1 within the next five years. This seems attainable as the industrial R&D

investment grew by 250% while the sales growth was at 200% between 2005 and

2010. An environment conducive for enhancing private sector investment in

R&D will be created.

Gross budgetary support for the science and technology sector has significantly

increased during the last decade. Accrual of benefits of such increase in the

GERD is becoming evident. India’s global share of scientific publications has, for

example, increased from 1.8% in 2001 to 3.5% in 2011. The Composite Annual

Growth Rate (CAGR) of Indian publications during the last three years is around

12±1%. But the percentage of Indian publications in the top 1% impact making

journals is only 2.5%. India should aim to increase its share of scientific

publications from the current 3.5% to over 7% and quadruple the number of

papers in top 1% journals from the current levels by 2020. Citation impact of

Indian publications must improve and match at least the global averages.

Initiatives under the new policy should enable this to exceed the global average

by 2020.

India ranks ninth globally in the number of scientific publications and 12th in the

number of patents filed. According to the Global Science Report of the UNESCO,

India’s current global ranking matches with its ranking with respect to the

number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) of R&D personnel. In order to match the

enhanced level of private sector investments in R&D and to maintain the tempo

of public sector investments, it is imperative that within the next five years the

total number of FTE of R&D personnel must increase by at least 66% of the

present strength.

Nourishing the root of Science for promoting Excellence in Research

Ensuring sustainable pipeline of talented youth for science is a challenge. India

has mounted some significant initiatives for attracting talent to science and

careers with research. Empowering stakeholders for local actions is a key

element of these initiatives. The policy framework will further enable school

science education through improvement of teaching methods and science

curricula, motivating science teachers and schemes for early attraction of talent to

science.

Combining Excellence and Relevance: Way Forward for Indian

Science

Basic research-led discoveries stimulate innovation in the long term. While

Indian investment in basic research will be further enhanced by fostering

excellence through global benchmarks and focusing on relevance for addressing

national challenges.

The few inter-university centres set up earlier have proved the concept to be a

successful and viable one. Such inter-university centres would be multiplied in

different fields to enable a wide cross section of university researchers to access

advanced research facilities and equipment which are otherwise not available in

university environments. Grand challenge programmes, where resource

deployment could bring tangible and intangible returns in the global setting, will

be launched.

Participation in Creation of Large Global R&D Infrastructures and Big

Science

Modern science is increasingly becoming resource intensive. There is a current

trend to create high-cost global infrastructures through international consortia

models. Given India’s global standing in science, invitation to participate in such

projects is expected to increase. Indian participation in such consortia-led

international projects will be encouraged and facilitated for improving access to

facilities for advanced research in cutting edge areas of science.

Attracting Private Sector Investments in R&D

Supply side interventions have hitherto been the main strategy for public

investment in R&D. The situation requires changing; equal emphasis on both

supply side interventions and demand based investments is needed. While

public investments in R&D should maintain the current rates of growth, private

investment has to increase significantly for translating R&D outputs into

commercial outcomes.

Public funds for partnerships with the private sector for social and public good

objectives will be earmarked as a new policy initiative. A National Science,

Technology and Innovation Foundation will be established as a Public Private

Partnership (PPP) initiative for investing critical levels of resources for

innovative and ambitious projects.

The focus of the policy environment will be:

_ Facilitating private sector investment in R&D centres in India and overseas.

_ Permitting multi stakeholders participation in the Indian R&D system.

_ Treating R&D in the private sector at par with public institutions for availing

public funds.

_ Bench marking of R&D funding mechanisms and patterns globally.

_ Aligning Venture Capital and Inclusion Innovation Fund systems.

_ Modifying IPR policy to provide for marching rights for social good when

supported by public funds and for co-sharing IPRs generated under PPP.

Science, Technology, Innovation Policy 2013 Page 6

_ Exploring newer mechanisms for fostering Technology Business Incubators

(TBIs) and science-led entrepreneurship.

_ Providing incentives for commercialization of innovations with focus on

green manufacturing.

Partnerships among Stake holders for Scaling Successes of R&D

Special and innovative mechanisms for leveraging academia-research-industry

partnerships will be devised. Success stories in S&T-based innovations from

Indian experience would be replicated and scaled up. Regulatory and legal

framework for sharing of IPRs between inventors and investors, and for closing

gaps in the translation of new findings into the commercial space, would be put

in place. Specifically the policy will focus on:

_ Prioritizing critical R&D areas like agriculture, telecommunications, energy,

water management, drug discovery, material science including nano

technology, climate change and space technology and promoting interdisciplinary

research,

_ Promoting innovations through mechanisms including “Small Idea-Small

Money” and “Risky Idea Fund” to support innovation incubators

_ Supporting STI driven entrepreneurship with high scaling coefficients and

viable business models,

_ Investing in young innovators and entrepreneurs through education and

training.

Gaining Global Competitiveness through Collaboration

Open source discoveries for public and social good form interesting innovation

systems. Knowledge commons is an emerging theme for managing IPRs created

through multi-stake holder participation. The STI Policy will foster data sharing

and access. Tapping global resources and especially Indian diaspora for

accelerating the pace of technology-led development would be pursued. Multisectoral

partnerships and alliances will be leveraged for upscaling national

competitiveness in research and manufacturing. The new policy framework will

enable strategic partnerships and alliances with other nations through both

bilateral and multilateral cooperation in science, technology and innovation.

Cooperation in areas like climate change and mitigating natural disasters are

important and beneficial. Science diplomacy, technology synergy and technology

acquisition models should be judiciously deployed based on strategic

relationships.

Performance-Reward Relationships

Transparent systems for tracking individual research performers based on past

and proven track record would be developed to enable grant based investments

in such performers. A well-designed centrally implementable Performance

Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS) for basic research leading to scientific

publications would be put in place.

For R&D leading to technology development and knowledge services, the

criteria would, however, be specific to the institution, the local conditions and

the context. Incentives to public-funded R&D centres for outcomes leading to

public and strategic goods could be introduced. Transparent performance reward

relationships and accountability for investments would form central

theme of the policy.

Leveraging Innovation potentials for Social Inclusion

Global innovations systems tend to bypass large sections of the community. The

instruments of the STI policy will aim at increasing accessibility, availability and

affordability of innovations. Establishment of a Fund for Innovations for Social

Inclusion will be a step in this direction.

Delivery systems for STI outputs to stake holders and Society

Migration of scientific outputs and technology interventions into the social

systems is a multi-layered process. Direct delivery of scientific outputs through

dissemination and public outreach by the scientific agencies and bodies is

possible only in relatively smaller number of sectors. The entire delivery

mechanism involves a large number of intermediaries from the public, nongovernmental

and private sectors. This requires strengthening of linkages

between the scientific and socio-economic sectors. The STI policy will leverage

the R&D allocations of socio-economic ministries through a shared vision on

addressing developmental challenges, co-generation of values through

partnerships, and co-investments, adoption of new delivery models and

maximization of stakeholder value perceptions.

The state governments constitute important stake holders and measures will be

taken to ensure that state-specific S&T vision and plans are informed by the new

STI Policy.

Transition from perception to evidence-based approaches for investment

decisions

Sound measurement principles for STI indicators are necessary for evidence

based policy actions. New and globally relevant indicators, which integrate

measures of excellence with relevance as well as inventiveness with affordability,

will be developed. Around 10 sectors of high impact potential, with commitment

to deploy commensurate resources, will be identified for directed STI

intervention. Enabling policy instruments that facilitate both research and

enterprise to focus their efforts in these will be put in place.

Global competitiveness of manufacturing sector is closely related to the

technology intensity of the sector, which in turn is a direct corollary of the

vitality of the R&D system in providing technology inputs. India’s share of

global trade in high technology products is presently only around 8%. The aim is

to double this share through innovations in high-technology products.

Appropriate supporting instruments will be put in place to stimulate the

development and deployment of high technology by industry.

Triggering Ecosystem changes for Science, Technology and

Innovation

A flexible approach that allows for fine tuning the Five Year Plan investments in

R&D, technology and innovation in response to rapid changes in STI ecosystem

would be put in place. Speed, scale and sustainability would be key governance

parameters for the new approach. Internal processes of institutions need to

build-in Trust as an integral principle in decision making. “Risks” are integral

parts of a vibrant national innovation system and policies must provide for risk

management strategies. Education is currently focused on understanding; it

should now embrace emphasis on Applications as well. Venture capital systems

need to adventure in risky innovations rather than to rely on incremental

innovations, new financing mechanisms for investing in enterprises without fear

of failure and options for foreclosing unsuccessful ventures are essential part of

such an enabling innovation ecosystem. India’s innovation machinery should

aim to lead rather than to follow safe paths of discovery. Hence Trust, Risk,

Application, Venture. Enterprise and Leadership should form new mantras of

the new STI ecosystem.

Gender Parity in STI Sector

Participation of women in STI activities is important. New and flexible schemes

would be put in place to address the mobility challenges of employed women

scientists and technologists. A broad scope for re-entry of women into R&D and

new facilitation mechanisms with special career path in diverse areas will also be

made feasible.

Public Awareness and Public Accountability of Indian STI sector

Public understanding of science is an important dimension for introducing and

reaching the benefits of modern science and technology to the people. Public and

political understanding of science should be based on evidence and debates with

open mind. The civilizational aspect of science or scientific temper needs to be

promoted across all sections of the society systematically. People and decision

makers must be made aware of the implications of emerging technologies,

including their ethical, social and economic dimensions. Effective science

communication methods, by using tools such as the National Knowledge

Network, will be initiated. These will enable all the stakeholders of the civil

society to discuss and present a collective perspective on such developments.

Mechanisms for assessing the performance of the national STI system by all the

stakeholders and reporting to the nation on a periodic basis will be established.

The national science academies will be accorded a major role in this endeavour of

public accountability.

Science, Technology and Innovation to serve National Agenda

Agriculture: R&D policy for agriculture is articulated by the Indian Council of

Agriculture Research (ICAR). Integration of the agriculture R&D policy with the

national R&D system and STI policy will be brought about.

Manufacturing: STI inputs to manufacturing sector offer opportunities for

enhanced employment generation. A strategic selection of sectors, where India

can aspire for leadership, would be made for focused STI inputs. A special drive

for stepping up R&D intensity in key manufacturing sectors with competitive

advantage will be mounted. Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) generally

have low R&D intensity. Special schemes to support R&D at the firm or

collective level, will be devised and put in place.

Services: The R&D intensity of the service sector needs to be enhanced

considerably and skill base also expanded significantly. Linkages between the

services with educational sectors for establishing human capacities will be

fostered through incentive mechanisms. For rapidly accomplishing the tasks of

modernization of technology-led services, technology missions, aimed at

achieving global leadership in some select areas in the services sector, will be

identified. Deployment of technology-led services for increasing transparency in

the Government machinery will also be supported.

Climate Change: Climate change is of global concern and India has articulated a

National Action Plan for Climate Change (NAPCC). The S &T system will have

to play an active role as a source of strategic knowledge for coping with the

challenges of climate change as well as in meeting equity-based differentiated

and shared responsibilities of India.

Policy Goal

STI policy 2013 is focused on serving India by connecting performance with

excellence and relevance. The policy goal of the Indian STI sector is to accelerate

the pace of discovery and delivery of science-led solutions for serving the

aspirational goals of India for faster, sustainable and inclusive growth. A strong

and viable Science, Research and Innovation System for High Technology-led

path for India (SRISHTI) is the goal of the new STI policy. Aspirations of India

would be serviced by an equally aspiring Indian STI system.

----------------------------------------