Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi
Hon’ble Minister of Science & Technology, HRD and Ocean Development.
On the occasion of the 90th Indian Science Congress-Bangalore, January 3-7, 2003
In the long history of civilizations, the Indian civilization is one of the few for whom the scientific impulse to know, to enquire has been a defining feature of its existence. In most other societies the realm of scientific inquiry was appropriated by a privileged few. Others were expected to follow - the governing metaphor being the shepherd and his flock. In our case, we adopted the restless pursuit of creative enquiry as our religion. The task, the 'dharma' of each individual was to pursue through a breathtaking choice of methodological options, the ends of true knowledge and enlightenment. It is to this cherished tradition that we pay homage through this annual congress of those who are driven by the same restless striving for meaning and truth which through millennia has throbbed in every Indian heart.
For the chosen theme this year there could not be a venue more appropriate than Bangalore. If one were to choose a single cultural characteristic to define Bangalore it would have to be Science and Technology - one represented by Sir C.V. Raman and the other by Dr. Vishweshariah. It is Bangaloreans like them and others like Shri Vannu Bappu who provided to this city an invigorating environment for the nurture of scientific and technological thought and innovation. No less is the contribution of the great public institutions established here - the Indian Institute of Science, the Raman Research Institute, the Indian Institute of Astrophysics, the Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, the National Aerospace Laboratory, the Aeronautical Development Authority, the Bangalore University, the University of Agricultural Sciences and, of course, the Indian Space Research Organisation. Few cities can boast of such a concentration of Science and Technology related institutions which in many ways makes Bangalore the Science and Technology capital of the country.
In this hub and nerve-centre of science and technology in the country and on this felicitous occasion today, we have cause for a grand celebration. All of you know that since September, 2001, we have been engaged in an intense but exciting dialogue to reformulate our Science & technology policy, a dialogue which involved scientists and technologists, social scientists, activists, politicians and administrators and concerned citizens. Various drafts were prepared, discussed at length, refined and modified. They were placed on the net for inviting public discussion. They were discussed at the highest levels of the Government and the academia before the final version was approved
You know that until now our commitment to Science and Technology had been enunciated in the Scientific Policy Resolution of 1958 and the Technology Policy Statement of 1983. These two documents had for long provided the road-map on the basis of which we built a strong S&T infrastructure which we can be justly proud of. These documents also provided the inspiration for achieving global competitiveness in such frontier areas of Science & Technology such as Space, Atomic Energy, Information Technology and Agriculture. The pace with which scientific and technological changes have taken place in the recent past and the expected acceleration in this pace in the foreseeable future meant, however, that our policy documents needed to be revisited. The scientific community had been urging for such a review and our Prime Minister had in this very forum made a commitment to all of you last year that the Government will bring out a new Science & Technology Policy. Ladies and Gentlemen, with his characteristic grace and magnanimity the Prime Minister has conferred on. me the privilege of making the first public announcement of the new Science & Technology Policy - 2003 which I will request him immediately afterwards to present to all of you and dedicate to the nation.
I believe that this is a moment charged with history. Why is a new Science and Technology Policy of such historic significance? There are several reasons and I would like to dwell a little on some of these.
The increased role of the Government in promoting, funding and incentivising scientific and technological development is a relatively recent phenomenon. The relationship between Government and Science, in the west, was largely transformed by the Second World War and the influence of Vannevar Bush in the US and of Haldane in UK. The conscious thrust given by the Government to science research was premised on the following principles - that basic science is performed without thought of practical ends - its defining characteristic being to push back the frontiers of fundamental understanding; and that basic research is the pacemaker of technological improvement.
Our own Science Policy Resolution of 1958 was to a considerable extent inspired by the Vannevar Bush model. The notions of science implicit in these models were still firmly anchored in Newtonian and Cartesian paradigms. Inherent to these paradigms was the dichotomy between science and society, between scientific knowledge and other kinds of knowledge, especially the social sciences, between matter and consciousness. Whereas science did achieve spectacular success by being treated as an autonomous domain, it also rationalized many harmful and socially destructive developments in the interests of furthering domain knowledge. It valorized splintering specialization and by distancing itself from social and ethical concerns it was unable to make any meaningful impact on problems of mass poverty, hunger, malnutrition, health conditions of the underprivileged and widespread environmental degradation and destruction. In fact science and technology often perpetuated and exacerbated some of these problems.
On of the most dangerous consequences of the dichotomous science that we have practiced since the industrial revolution has been the disturbance of the delicate relationship between human beings and nature. Global warming, water scarcity, deforestation, arable land degradation, desertification, unprecedented concentration of Green House Gases are just some of the consequences of the uncritical acceptance of the myth of the social, political and ethical neutrality of science and technology.
In contemporary times, the problem has been further compounded by the narrow techno-economic vision within which globalisation is perceived. Globalization has to be seen in the context of sharp inequalities prevailing among the countries of the world, Inequalities of consumption, of productive wealth generation capacities, of infrastructure availability, of the availability of public goods and services. In its present form, the process of globalization is premised on wasteful consumption patterns of the rich, a propagation of the value of unlimited consumer choice as the driving force of economic growth, and a fuelling of aspirations for the life-styles of the rich. In a situation of disproportionate consumption on the part of the rich on the one hand and the vicious spiral of poverty-environment-population problem triad on the other, the strain on natural resources of the earth has become unbearable. A globalization process which relies on perpetuating ever higher levels of consumption can only mean the globalization of poverty, inequality and ecological degradation.
It was our concern with the values of sustainability and the need for science and technology to be directly linked to societal needs that we needed to re-visit our S&T policy. While our commitment to science and technology had not changed, we recognized that global change has necessitated a closer more direct link between science and technology and societal needs. Our new policy, therefore, is anchored in our abiding belief that for science and technology to grow, it must be green, it must be ethical, it must have a human face, it must be gender sensitive, it must be region and context-specific, reflect our enormous diversity and plurality, and it must empower the community as a whole and not merely a section of it.
Contrary to the linearity of the earlier paradigms, we now see S&T policy in more holistic terms. Our belief is that science must touch every facet of national life. The thrust of the policy is to use science and technology as the key problem-solving instrument in all endeavours, including in agriculture, industry, business, trade, services as well as in governance, Providing creative and innovative solutions in health services, population. management, mitigating the damage to vast sections of our people from natural hazards like earthquakes and cyclones, technologies for conservation of land, water and energy resources and their integrated management for sustainable development and consumption leading to their ecologically balanced management are the cornerstones of our new policy.
A very significant aspect of the new policy which needs to be underscored is that instead of treating 'science’ as distinct from 'technology' with each having separate sets of policies, we now treat both as being inter-related, inter-dependent and harmonised. The progression from science to technology is not linear. Technological developments often lead to new science and vice-versa. Science itself cannot grow independent of technology. The conventional dividing lines have blurred and therefore the new policy speaks of both in the same breath. Further, science and technology themselves form a part of a holistic tapestry of interdependent influences - social, economic, cultural, ecological and political. In this the new policy conforms to the trend within science itself to search for a unifying theory of everything and establish the unbroken wholeness between man and the eco-system, the eco-system and our planet Earth, the planet Earth and the universe.
This brings me to the theme of frontiers of science. It is not surprising that as science extricates itself out of its reductionist warp and reaches the frontiers, knowledge domains begin to converge, boundaries dissolve, inter-connections are revealed and science begins to knock at the doors of spirituality. At the frontiers, therefore, it is pertinent to recall that the deep and indivisible interconnection between individual human consciousness and the physical, observable universe as manifestations of an indescribable universal consciousness - the Brahman - has been the central concern of the ancient Indian philosophical and scientific enquiry traditions. Thousands of years before modem physics, especially quantum physics, arrived at conclusions about the dissolution of strict distinctions between cause and effect, between the observer 'in-here' and the world 'out- there', strikingly similar conclusions had been reached in Indian vedantic and upanishadic thought. In the same way as David Bohm, Clauser, Freedman, Allen Aspect Gang Zukov and others through their experiments reached the conclusion that separate parts of the Universe are connected in an intimate and immediate way, the Upanishads had said : (That which is in the microcosm is also in the macrocosm)
To stretch the frontiers further we need to fuse these ancient insights with contemporary knowledge and make India once again the fountainhead of a new science, of new knowledge paradigms. This is an unprecedented opportunity where our access to ancient knowledge and our 'genetic software', as Paul Davies terms it, gives us a global edge in assuming a leadership role. I believe that the new policy will inspire you to work in this direction.
The thrust of the new policy towards integration of science and technology with societal concerns offers leadership opportunities in other ways as well. In a brilliant graphic exposition, Dr. Mashelkar had once demonstrated to me that if one were to draw a quadrant and arrange the countries of the world in different squares in terms of science and technology capacity on the one hand and levels of economic development on the other it would lead to some very interesting conclusions. One square will be occupied by the poorest countries such as those of Sub-Saharan Mrica with low S & T capacities, one by countries such as oil rich countries of the Middle-East who are economically developed but have insufficient S & T capacity. The third will be that of the developed countries of the west with high S &T capacities. The most interesting one, however, will be of countries like India, China and Brazil with high S&T capabilities but relatively lower levels of economic development. The poorest are unable to use S &T for their betterment because they do not have S &T capacities. The rich who do not have S&T capacity cannot help even if they are interested. The rich who also have high S&T capacity have no intention of or interest in employing their capacity for the benefit of the poor. The only ones who have the interest, the need and the capacity are countries like India, China and Brazil. Who will develop a low cost 'simputer' for the poor, if not India? Who will develop natural drugs and remedies like Asmon for the poor, if not us? Who will use biotechnology for providing supplements to the undernourished mother if not us? Who will lead the world in cutting edge technologies for sustainable consumption, for climate change mitigation? Who other than us should show the way forward in solar energy, in hydrogen energy, in nano-technologies?
In our approach to the development of cutting edge technologies there are some questions which we need to constantly ask. Do our technologies benefit the poor and the deprived? Do they contribute to the regeneration of our natural environment? Do they empower civil society? Do they minimize waste and energy consumption? Only if the answer is positive to all these, must we put all our resources to developing them and acquiring a leadership position. In Information Technology we should therefore focus on bridging the digital divide, in decentralizing governance and in enhancing the capacity of the poor to take control over their lives. In Bio-technology it should be to conserve our biodiversity, to improve nutrition levels especially of women and children, to increase the productivity of small and marginal farmers and to develop drugs and remedies which are affordable and efficacious. In Nano-technologies it should be to increase the efficiency of converting energy to light, to reduce the costs and improve quality of medical diagnostics, to develop nano-tags and imaging systems which will enable early detection of disease and reduce the costs of health care. In other words the societal dimension has to be paramount and it is this which will provide our science and technology development initiatives, uniqueness of character and confer on us a leadership status.
Allow me to reflect a little further on how we approach the issue of taking a leadership role in the development of cutting edge technologies. It is important in my view not to be entrapped in the consumerist techno-economic dream offered by the west. I have already spoken of the criticality of rooting Science and Technology development processes in a societal context. Among other things this requires remodeling our technology development and technology application processes so as to be similar to natural processes. A natural eco-system functions as a closed loop involving slow changes, which occur at a pace which allows time for adaptation to the natural environment. In contrast, technology has so far used a linear approach in which resources are extracted as though they are inexhaustible, processed to make synthetic products which have no natural counterparts, involve lengthy transportation both of raw materials and manufactured products and each step impacts on the environment and generates waste. Further technology design is insufficiently evaluated in terms of its impact on nature. We need technologies which completely eliminate the concept of waste, we need to design every process so that the products themselves, as well as leftover chemicals, materials and effluents can be reused in other processes. We need quantum leaps in energy efficiency and a shift from non-renewable to renewable sources, by applying the principle of de-carbonisation.
Some years ago, Robin Clarke of Biotechnical Research and Development in UK catalogued a thirty-five point criteria for what he called a 'soft technology society'. These include ecological soundness, low energy inputs, use of renewable and recyclable materials, craft industry orientation, integration with nature, democratic politics, decentralization, emphasis on agricultural diversity, community control, multi-disciplinarity, science and technology not dependent on the specialist elite but performed by all, among others, as the essential constituents of an ideal social system and as the criteria for evaluating the appropriateness of technology solutions. Some bf the categories are possibly contradictory and some impracticably utopian but the overall approach they represent makes for a coherent statement of an ideal society. With some modifications to reflect contemporary developments and some flexibility, such a criteria can serve as a measure for differentiating between 'good' and 'bad' technology, and for setting standards for scientific and technological capacity development.
The approach I have outlined forms the underpinning of our new policy. Any policy, however can only outline our vision and philosophy, set directions and suggest an approach to implementation. The task of converting the policy into clearly articulated strategies and action plans, in the short, medium and long terms, belongs to all of you. I hope that this Congress will seize this historic opportunity to do so, especially when it is led by a President of the Congress whose remarkable feats of success in the field of Space, Science and Technology have presaged and prefigured our future gloriousness.
Mr. Prime Minister, it was your vision and decisiveness which in May 1998 unshackled our scientific and technological potential and powers and it was you who gave us the inspiring call for 'Jai Vigyan'. What better tribute to this call can there be than to dedicate to the Nation the Science & Technology Policy 2003 of your Government. Sir, I have the rare privilege of requesting you to do so now.
