View > Home / Genesis of Science / Murmuring at the Academy

Murmur at the Academy

May 25, 2010 TrV No. 54, p. 1,
Boris Stern
Category: Genesis of Science

no comments

The main topic of this issue of TRV was the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, held on May 18. The main attention of commentators was attracted by the appearance of the prime minister. But in fact, a much more significant event took place that day - the announcement of the statement of the General Meeting of the Physical Sciences Division. In fact, this is a revolt of the most “advanced” branch of the Academy against the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. This have not happened before!

The application was accepted by the members of the Branch the day before the General Meeting.

The proposal was made by corresponding member Evgeniy Maksimov from the theoretical department of FIAN, who worked closely with Vitaly Ginzburg for many years. The text of the statement was adopted unanimously.

The statement is dominated by diplomatic formulations addressed to PRAN - “insufficiently active advocacy...”, etc. On the sidelines, I heard from members of the Department much harsher assessments of the activities of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Yuri Osipov (like the fact that these people are concerned exclusively with their own interests) and more radical proposals (for example, introducing a 70-year age limit for administrative positions). Some spoke out publicly, for example, academicians Vladimir Nakoryakov (TrV No. 53) and Vladimir Zakharov (“Nezavisimaya Gazeta” dated January 13, 2010). Despite the streamlined formulations, this is a real rebellion, and long overdue. Indeed, recent trends (cuts in funding for the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research), government events (Kurchatov Research Center, Skolkovo) and scandals (Petrick-gate, publication in Nature of criticism of Yuri Osipov’s statement), etc. lead to increasingly strong suspicions that with the current composition and current policy of the Presidium, the chances of the Academy, and with it Russian science, are quickly approaching zero.

Probably, members of the FN branch voted for the Appeal for various reasons; someone and in very different ways from those listed above. But be that as it may, the initiative deserves widespread support. Are there any chances that the physicists' demarche will lead to real changes at the Academy? The “initiators” themselves look at this quite skeptically: until the physicists are supported by other departments, it is easy for the Presidium to “wind up” their appeal. And the fact that they will be supported by other branches is not at all obvious.

The General Meeting of the Division of Physical Sciences addresses the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences with the following statement:

1. Recently, the media and statements of some government officials have suggested the ineffectiveness of Russian science and belittled the role of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the development of scientific research and education in the country.

2. This position is biased, because the analysis of data on publications and citations of scientific works, given in most Russian and foreign information sites, indicates the dominant role (more than 50% of all published works) of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The same applies to issues of scientific and scientific-technical expertise, training of scientific personnel and close connections between academic research institutions and higher education. A striking example of such a connection is Moscow State University, which produces 10% of scientific output in Russia and employs 300 members of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

3. Currently, a significant part of the funding of science, in particular through the Ministry of Education and Science, takes place without proper scientific expertise from the RAS in accordance with its statutory responsibilities and role in the state, which can lead to ineffective use of public funds.

4. The General Meeting of the Division of Physical Sciences draws the attention of the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences to the insufficiently active defense of the interests of Russian science by the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

5. There is a feeling that there is no clear position of the state regarding the prospects for the development of fundamental science, which in the long term is the basis of the innovative economy. At one time, the Presidium of the State Council of the Russian Federation, the Science Council under the President of Russia and the Security Council made a strategically important decision to support fundamental research. Its validity period expires this year 2010. What will replace it is unknown.

6. The General Meeting of the Division of Physical Sciences addresses the General Meeting of the RAS with a proposal to devote the next General Meeting of the RAS to discussing the role and tasks of the RAS in the current circumstances. It is necessary to hold such a meeting this year, preferably in October 2010.

The appeal begins with challenging statements in the media about the ineffectiveness of Russian science and the Academy. Since complaints against TRV regarding criticism of the RAS were also voiced, we consider it useful to once again dot the i’s:

1. We really believe that the management and organization of the work of the Academy, which are determined by the Presidium, are extremely archaic and ineffective, however...

2. ...this is true if normalized to the world level. Nevertheless, the RAS actually produces more than half of Russia’s “scientific product” (the figure of 50% in the Appeal is even somewhat underestimated; in terms of the number of articles and the number of highly cited scientists, the contribution is more likely about 60%).

3. All other major forms of existence of science in Russia are worse.

4. All plans to create something better in Russia in place of the Academy in the current historical realities are ridiculous.

5. Therefore, the Academy must survive, and the only way to survive can only be self-reform, starting with a change in leadership.

Previously, the prevailing view was that this was impossible. Now there is some vague hope. That is why we call on all scientists and science journalists to support the initiative of academic physicists.

Boris Stern

Discuss in the LJ community trv_science_ru

See in the same section: