RFFICAL: A serious step backward

The new composition of the Council of the Russian Fund for fundamental research was approved by order of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 9, 2016 No. 1894-r. In the new composition of the Council - 41 dicks. 11 people, including the chairman of the council Vladislav Panchenko, the director of the Kurchatov Center Mikhail Kovalchuk, the scientific director of the special observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Yuri Balegi, a biologist from the Moscow State University Olga Dontsova, from the former composition of the council.

Three people - the rector of Mgima Anatoly Torkunov, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Valery Tishkov and the President of the Russian Academy of Arts Zurab Tsereteli - were members of the Council of the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Fund (RGNF). Recall that this fund was attached to the Russian Federation by order of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 29, 2016 No. 325-r. This measure caused considerable criticism in the scientific community.

“This is a serious step back,” said Andrei Tsaturyan, a member of the Council of Scientists, member of the Council of Scientists, in a commentary on Polit.ru, a member of the Council of Science, a member of the Council of Scientists. According to him, the former composition of the council included people who, before inclusion in the Council, became the initiators of the massive petitions of scientists - Oleg Melnik and Dmitry Dyakonov. “Dyakonov died, and those who expressed an alternative point of view in the council, Oleg Melnik and Valery Rubakov, were removed from the council,” Andrei Kimovich emphasized. He also drew attention to the fact that transparency disappears from the activities of the RFFI. If earlier, key decisions were made by the Council of the RFFIF, now the Bureau of the Council consisting of a limited number of members of the Council.

A physicist from Fian, a member of the Central Committee of the Trade Union of RAS employees, Yevgeny Onishchenko, said that if in 2006 the share of initiative grants in the RFFI was 63%, now it was planned to allocate less than 40%every year. According to him, “in the sequestered version of the 2016 budget, the total financing of the two united funds of the RFFIF and the RGNF is 11.6 billion rubles .. In 2017, the RFFI budget is planned to cut up to 10.9 billion rubles. If this year financing of the Russian Scientific Fund, taking into account sequestration, is 15.2 billion rubles, then next year it will decrease - to 14.3 billion rubles. By 2019, funds are planned to be reduced by another 5 %financing. ”

In a recent article by A. Tsaturyan, it was noted that “the main type of Russian competitions should be initiative projects, as it was in the first two decades of the work of the fund; At least 70% of all funds sent by the fund to support scientific projects should be allocated for their financing, and at least 20% of these funds should be allocated to support public and humanities; Not a single Grant of the RFFI, including the complex, should surpass the average initiative grant by more than three times. ” Let me remind you that this article by Andrei Kimovich was a presentation of theses from the analytical note of the Council on Science on the problems of scientific funds.

Colleagues also draw attention to the fact that at a new disposal of the government of the positions of some members of the Council “hidden”. So Vladimir Kvardakov, deputy. The chairman of the previous council, until some time, was the executive director of the Kurchatov Center. He, like the director of the center Mikhail Kovalchuk, retained their posts in the council.

It should be noted that the corresponding members of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vladimir Kvardakov, Olga Dontsova and Yuri Baleg presented their candidates for the positions of academicians to the Academy of Sciences in the upcoming elections at the end of October 2016.

The company of scientists also note the share of the administration
(directors/rectors/ presidents and their deputies), in the new composition of the Russian Council, the RFFIs remained almost the same - about 75% (31/41), as in the last composition.

“Experience shows that the effectiveness of the public body (council, commission) is determined by the shares of non -adults, i.e. real workers
And this share can be called the coefficient of efficiency or efficiency of the organ. Thus, the efficiency of the RFFI Council is 25%. For scientific bodies, the dominance of administrators causes additional harm, because Each of them defends the interests of their organizations and scientific schools in position. In addition, the dominance of directors leads to the trend of supporting large projects to the detriment of small ones. We clearly see this in the Russian Federation and the new composition is unlikely to bring improvements. Apparently, then the desperate calls of the scientific community will be ignored to increase the share of initiative grants “A” by reducing the share of large Grants “Offic” , ”said Alexander Fradkov, co -chairman of the Council of Society of Scientists, in his commentary.

At his leisure, each reader can engage in meditation on the lists of the Russian Federation Council. This table contains two compositions of the Councils of the Russian Federation of 2012 and 2016 . The names of those colleagues who remained in the new composition of the Council are highlighted with bold.

 Irkutsk Scientific Center SB RAS

 Southern Federal University

 Institute of Cytology and Genetics SB RAS

 Neurosurgery