Wherever a clause of nomination is included, the chance of prejudice and servitude will emerge and that can mar scientific progress
Several scientists like Sir C V Raman in pre-independent India made breakthrough discoveries but did not get the Nobel Prize. The impact of their research was so high that the western world had to recognize them even without the prize. Several were nominated for Nobel Prize multiple times. For instance, Meghnad Saha was nominated seven times. If we consider the number of FRS and knighted persons as a symbol of quality research, it is evident thattheir number was more during the pre-independent era than post-independent India. Does it show that our present-day scientific research is not up to the mark?
It is essential to kindle our thoughts on this. Why do many great researchers of the present generation fail to get attention in the scientific world?
When we reflect on our great scientists who survived the harsh colonial environment, we will understand that they got attention because of their networking and collaboration with the western scientific community. To gain recognition in science, either one should have renowned scientists as mentors or breakthrough discoveries published in international scholarly publications. Many scientific prizes are based on nominations, for which collaboration with foreign scientists seems to be an essential factor.
No scientific award selects someone fortheir merit alone. Even in India,we follow this nomination system for the selection of many of the prestigious awards. Why cannot a researcher apply for the Nobel prize or even our prestigious Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize directly? Where ever a clause of nomination is included, the chance of prejudice and servitude will emerge in science. Only those close to power centres have the opportunity of winning the awards. This culture is indeed spoiling the scientific ecosystem. Researchers will always try to appease their superiors to get benefits rather than concentrating on their work. The appeasement politics in Indian science has grown to such an extent that researchers simply give gift authorship to their peers, who don’t have any contribution to the work. More than gifting authorship the researchers lose their integrity and dignity by blindly following the instructions from their superiors. This, at many times, will affect scientific productivity.
If science has to improve, we need to inculcate a culture for free-thinking among the scientific community,where no one, including the funding agencies, directly or indirectly should not influence their research. Here, we have to appreciate our great scientists in the pre-independent era, who just followed their scientific curiosity irrespective of its outcome. Sir C V Raman was even against utilizing government funds for research. When one receives Government support, they may need to compromise on a great deal in their research, besides giving much time to creating files. No scientist or government department will have the courage to publicly state their scientific result if it’s against the government’s stated policy of the time or against the interests of their reporting officers. This is the reason why in our society, many problems persist, be it the adulteration in food or faulty infrastructure development policies, even today, even though our scientific community have developed sound scientific solutions.
Our great scientists had only one vision:making the country self-sufficient through the fruits of science. Most of these scientists focussed on problems that the society of the time demands or curiosity instigated by nature. The transdisciplinary culture modern scientists propel is not new to our scientific community. If one traces the history of these great scientists, we can see that they practised transdisciplinary culture in their research. J C Bose made pioneering contributions in physics and biology, and there are many such examples in the scientific history of India. Many scientists of the old generation can be considered as a polymath, having expertise in a wide variety of topics.
It’s always better to remember the travails passed by these great scientists as it will inspire us to do great things in science and avoid specifictrials during our research.
Most of our current scientific research is focused on the mandate of a particular research institute. Even if scientists want to do research from their area of expertise or passion, they are tied by the institute’s rules. Veryfew institutions provide free and unconditional space to work. Otherwise, rules even curb them to speak freely with the media or the public. Dissidence is the success of science, and if there is no dissidence among the scientific community, science will not grow. When a patient is in a critical situation, in good hospitals the doctor’s team discusses the pros and cons of a particular procedure. This usually produces good results. In scientific research also,scientists should be allowed to brainstorm among themselves, especially whene deriving some crucial stuff that directly affects the public.
Another area of concern relates to publication of scientific research and giving authorship to heads of institutes as a way of appeasing superiors. Some research scholars who may have toiled hard may be excluded from authorship. Some researchers are busy trying to get themselves published in high impact journals rather than concentrating on their research. Few scientists who think out of the box and do creative work struggle to publish their research. This can improve only if we make it mandatory to publish our research findings in our journals. Let foreign scientists explore our journals and in that way, the impact of our journals can also improve in the scientific world. Even journals published by government institutions and academies are not getting enough coverage among the Indian scientific community. The undue importance given to impact factorshould be abolished from academic appraisals. This creates a gap between people who want to do good science and those who focus only on citations. The increasing number of scientific manipulations reported from our reputed research labs is ample proof of this. These bring discredit to Indian science and the country which boast a great scientific heritage that the world looked envious. Our early scientists never bothered about publications or patents. Their only focus was doing good science. Being the pioneers in the raw field of science, they were free to do the science as they wanted; nobody interfered in their research. Present-day researchers donot have much freedom in this respect, as half of their precious time is wasted on administrative duties and paperwork.
When we celebrate National Science Day,we must create a healthy scientific environment where seeds for future science can be sowed in a fertile climate. Our research centres should be spaces for innovative research where our youngsters could pursue their interests with free will, without any hindrance from their superiors, and having the courage to furnish scientific facts without fear. By reflecting on the travails overcome by our predecessors, our policymakersshould take steps to make India a global destination in science and technology.
(The writer is a science communicator and columnist. The views expressed are personal.)