The structure of scientific debates

Another contribution that went off well from India was the plenary speech by M.S. Swaminathan, who was more reflective. He set the goals for global science clearly, but was circumspect aboutinstitutional responses. Meetings like Budapest at one level are jamborees. But there was an undercurrent of seriousness and some worry in the community of science czars 8212; the super scientists as my friend Nazli Choucri of MIT described herself. Nazli, who together with me had signed the Hague Declaration, a major intellectual input for the Rio conference, was emphasising the need to develop institutions to relate super science with human need.

Responsible science opinion, for example, was terribly worried about the disaster in the global negotiations on a safety concordat for biotechnology negotiations, where business interests had walked out on a carefully produced scientific draft. Science chiefs wanted arrangements where they have a major say, if not a dominating role as in the past. Commerce and security are the driving forces behind technology today, which is truly supra-national, but scientists are not there in the driver8217;s seat 8212; they are sometimes not there even in the bus.

I was asked topresent the Third World view in a session on a social contract on science in the next millennium, where I pretty much 8220;globalised8221; the arguments in this column on the need to help those who help themselves, but the most interesting suggestion was from the chief of the influential Swiss science think tank, the Forum Engelberg, a scientist who had interacted with India in the famous CERN reactor research programme. Why not, he suggested, have a global group which arbitrates on purely scientific aspects of controversies which arise in implementation of science. This was an interesting idea. I thought it should be of interest to India, since a lot of the technology restrictions, for example, placed on it did not have a basis either in science or international law. I was told later that some of the 8220;whales8221; 8212; large countries like China, India, Brazil, Russia and Indonesia 8212; supported it, but others didn8217;t.

The World Bank expert of Egyptian origin, Ismail Seragaldin, brings out that in biotechnology,particularly the genome area, a tremendous concentration of resources is taking place with a single company developing the capability to present solutions to any problem in a timebound manner. He wants contract arrangements worked out to relate these resources with solutions to hunger and health problems of the Third World.

I personally believe that openness, a greater reliance on transparency and professionalisation in world affairs will be in India8217;s long-term interest. So I had negotiated and signed with the US, for example, an overarching science cooperation agreement. I also wanted us to take a more proactive role at the Kyoto conference on carbon emissions, including the discussion on tradable emission quotas. Any genuine arrangements of this kind would be in our interest. But the powers that be are either not interested or are afraid of engagement and the country remains marginalised.

By far the most interesting event at Budapest was a meeting at which those involved with the scientific programmesof Unesco met to review performance and the outlook for the next century. Interestingly, no one was there from India. I was there, but in my individual capacity as the chairman of the scientific steering committee of Unesco8217;s International Social Science Programme called MOST, Management of Social Transformation. Apart from social science, Unesco8217;s powerful programmes were involved with hydrology, earth and environmental sciences, water. The power of science to address some of mankind8217;s most fundamental problems was on display. Two powerful messages came out. Modern technology is interdisciplinary 8212; computers, satellites, biotechnology and new materials help each other and can be scaled to the level of communities to solve their problems. The programmes have a lot to learn from each other and are gradually moving to institutional systems that work. It was decided that we would meet together to work out concrete inter-programme linkages.

I wish we were there. I come back home and one day the defenceestablishment says our satellites will in the future track infiltrators. A few days later ISRO tells us that our satellites can pick out a buffalo, and the data is available to anybody, including the army. Having used their data to design three check dams at JNU, which have really helped its water problem, and having lectured on how they can be used for surveillance, I believe ISRO. Coordination, networking and synergy is the name of the game, whether in agriculture, public health or security.