Science
can only flourish in freedom: scientists should be allowed to choose their
subjects freely, they should be trusted to find the most challenging frontiers
of knowledge to be pushed back. Scientific breakthroughs cannot be forced, cannot
be achieved ‘on command’. One counter-example sometimes quoted is the
development of the atomic bomb. It is true that forces had to be joined at an
unprecedented level in order to collect and develop all the knowledge and
technology needed for such a gigantic project. But the basic knowledge had been
obtained in research purely driven by curiosity, by the desire to push back
frontiers. I refer to the discovery of radioactivity, of the atomic nucleus, of
fission. Based on the understanding of neutron induced fission the idea of a
chain reaction was born. This fundamental knowledge was the basis for the
Manhattan project. On a more peaceful note: joining forces on a global level to
achieve controlled fusion is a challenge that has been taken up by the ITER
project. Also here most of the underlying physics is known, but the
technological challenges for achieving energy production on a ‘routine’ basis
are still enormous.
Scientific
freedom does not mean that funding for scientific projects comes easy. Scientists
apply for funding of their favorite projects and only the most excellent of
these win grants. It may sound straightforward, but it is at the heart of all
successful scientific research systems worldwide. In May 2012 a large gathering
of national research organisations (‘councils’)
took place in Washington, hosted by the National Science Foundation,
NSF: the North American research funding organisation. During this meeting,
where 40 nations, including the Netherlands were represented the Global
Research Council was founded. In a careful first step as a ‘virtual
organisation’, i.e. an organisation free of overhead (‘bureaucracy’) without a
‘boss’ and with collective ownership. As a first topic of common interest the
GRC discussed ‘merit review’ or ‘peer
review’ as the basis for selecting the
best research proposals in the granting process. It may not sound very exciting
but it is very important to share common values and principles as the basis for
(international) cooperation. Because scientific research is, increasingly, a
global endeavor. And it is fantastic to see how science is able to transcend
political differences. Nations that still have some distance to go before a
truly democratic political system is in place, adhere to ‘merit review’ –
intrinsically democratic - as the basis
for their national research funding system. Science brings nations together.
Science
brings those nations together that have a thriving scientific community. The
Netherlands have such a community, strong and excellent but threatened by
undernourishment. To the vision of the necessity of a well organised and
properly funded scientific community for
addressing scientifically, economically and societally relevant topics I would
like to add the vision that such a community adds to our international
standing. And to our national pride. A country without significant science will
cease to exist.
The
Global Research Council will convene again in May 2013, in Berlin. The topics
to be addressed, the ‘common values’ to be established are ‘scientific
integrity’ and Open Access (to scientific publications and data). This summit will be commonly organised by the
German research council (DFG) and the Brazilian research council (CNPq).
The
Netherlands are not automatically invited to the G20, the economic summit, but
they are a natural guest and participant in ‘scientific summits’ like the GRC. I will make every effort to keep
it that way. What the Euro has a hard time to do, science can achieve easily:
science brings nations together!
Jos Engelen
June 15, 2012
