Innovation vs science

Fundamental research funding has unexpected results

In recent decades the governments of many countries, in our region as well as in the rest of the world, have considerably increased the budgets destined to scientific research under the conviction that these measures will benefit society as a whole, both in the short and in the long term. Above all, there is consensus concerning the value involved in the so-called fundamental or "basic" research since, independent of the discipline, it is undeniable that excellence in science will generate innovation and that the latter, in turn, will foster economic growth. In view of this fact, many governments have decided to reduce the funds addressed to technological development, dedicating more resources to fundamental research.

Currently, however, many scientific policies are being influenced by factors of economic character (such as the fear of a global recession) that favor the criterion of competitiveness. Following this logic, in Chile the modality has been adopted of financing innovation through technological projects, instead of doing it indirectly, through fundamental research. This situation reflects itself, day to day, in a group of questions, not always easy to answer, that are posed constantly to scientists: What is your research good for? or What are the financial results deriving from them? This kind of questions imply a great risk to science development in the country: that of centering the focus of attention, when projects to be funded are being selected, on their economic relevance, instead of doing so on their scientific merits.

In Chile, this has been reflected, unfortunately, in the 2008 budget, seriously affecting the execution of activities fundamental to national science, such as basic research projects, doctoral fellowships and the human resource training programs. This imminent shortness of funds could immerse Chilean science in an abyss from which it will be difficult to emerge.

It is essential that our authorities understand that not only such disciplines that carry an economic impact should be stimulated. This goes against the policies established by Fondecyt, the Chilean agency for the promotion of science and technology, whose central axis is project funding on the basis of excellence, whichever the area of study, as is also the case of institutions for science promotion in several countries in the region. It should not be forgotten that the paths of science are not predictable and that economic benefits from projects can arise at the most unexpected moment. A clear example of this fact are the recent applications of DNA studies: in the beginning its usefulness in paternity determination or in forensic expertise had not been anticipated.

The greater the development of nations, more consciousness exists about the role of public funding in the promotion of fundamental science and of the role of the productive and entrepreneurial sectors of society in technological development. The actions carried out by the latter in our countries reveal, unfortunately, very limited efforts.

We shall not rest until it is demonstrated that the Chilean scientific community is not only able, but the most suited to innovate on the basis of science and, at the same time, to stimulate scientific ideas. Our commitment as scientists is that of generating and fostering projects of excellence. ¿And that of the government? Undoubtedly: to warrant funding for fundamental research.

Jorge BaBul C.

President

Council of Scientific Societies of Chile