May 29 will elect a new president of the Russian Academy of Sciences – the most prestigious scientific organization in the country. This year, the academics will choose from three candidates, and the result of the election is difficult to predict
Photo: Sergey Guneev / RIA Novosti
President of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) always chooses the general meeting of academics. Before that, the candidates put forward compartment Academy and the Bureau. The president is selected when it voted for more than 50% of the participants of the meeting. If the majority does not gain one, a second round, then maybe the third. If the winner is not determined in three stages, the new elections. Such is democracy.
This year, for the first time since 1991, the president is elected Yuri Osipov, who held this post until now and who shot his candidacy last week. Thus, there were three candidates: Physics Vladimir Alferov and Forts and economist Alexander Nekipelov.
Alignment quite difficult. Vladimir Fortova advanced 7 offices and supported the Presidium of Russian Academy of Sciences, Nobel laureate Jaures Alferov – 4 offices, Alexander Nekipelova – 3. Voices of the Presidium of the split as follows: for Fortova 34 people, against – 21; Alferov for 23 against – 29; Nekipelova for 23, against – 28. Before the general meeting of the Academy of Vladimir Fortova we questioned about his pre-election program.
Why Academy more twenty years chose one and of same man ?
These twenty years have been very difficult. The Academy was in a state of survival and focused around Yuri Osipov, who did much to it is preserved in the form in which it now is.
I read your program , but not found on tveta on total question : for what need fundamental Science country ?
This question of a choice: either we want to be a supplier of raw materials, or a modern developed nation “golden billion”. If our place in the “golden billion”, that is among the advanced countries, it is very simple estimates show that only high-technology can provide the needed for this high productivity. Today we have four to five times the performance behind the leading countries of the world.
President is selected when it receives the majority of the participants. If these do not turn out a second round, and if necessary, a third
I seen evaluation – in three times …
Well, let’s consider three. Increase productivity three times can only be developing high-tech products where the added value is high. On the raw ingredients you do not make such a leap. It’s a question of political and economic choices if we want to be a developed country, no other way. If we want to remain in the same state as it is now, we can deal with raw materials. As we can see, the political leadership of the country clearly for the first option.
But if we embarked on this path, without the Academy of Sciences can not do, because here are the most qualified people in the country.
A now what place is Sciences in life Russia ?
My point is that both society and the leadership began to understand the present position of the Russian Academy of Sciences as a center, home to the research staff, which has created a world-class research schools.
But
in public life Academy now invisible . How what – it detached Castalia .
Yes, its role has diminished. But this is largely to blame ourselves – a little generate new ideas, do not deal with the public explanation of what is the place of science in the modern world. Therefore, there is a consumer attitude: “We bought the phone in China, the machine – in Germany. And all is well, everything works … “But when you aspire to the heights of the real, then nothing happens without science. Today, such an understanding is, and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin firmly says it. Therefore, I believe that the Russian Academy of Sciences are quite good prospects.
Then more one question : have view , that this structure at all not need . In particular , Minister Education and Science Dmitry Livanov said , that this structure unfashionable and viable . P donkey what of public board at Ministry out Juarez Alferov and you . So here question : can be , really n Auca to be arranged otherwise ? No Academy ? After anything like Academy Sciences today in world nowhere not , yes ?
Not at all. Academic way of organizing science adopted not only for us. It is assumed, for example, in China – they are almost a copy of our Academy. And China is now demonstrating an absolutely fantastic growth is in the field of high technologies. Academic system in our environment to be effective, sustainable, and it should make the maximum use. Russian Academy of Sciences is working effectively, is respected in the world. Very many, even our critics, seek to become members of the Academy.
In your election program you lot say on that , that need reformed system Management Sciences . A that is Academy now ?
In two words can not explain it, but I will say one important thing to readers: This is a very democratic system. We are engaged in gaining new knowledge. And we do not know in advance what will make the opening of this or that person or team. We do not have an exclusive right to the truth. It is in other structures, “if I’m the boss, so I know everything” – we do not have. We have a democratic structure. We select all, from a research assistant and ending with the president of the Academy of Sciences.
How , example , choose Director and nstituta ?
There’s a complicated multi-stage system. It starts with the team of the Academic Council of the Institute. Then vote on the Bureau of the Department of the Academy – for example, if a chemist, the chemical, if a mathematician – mathematical … Then at the general meeting room and then to the presidium of the Academy of Sciences. And at every stage of your colleagues can deny you trust. President of the Academy does not issue orders – issued the order of the Presidium, the collegial body. For organizations that are involved in basic research, it is good. For applied research is not optimal.
Yuri Osipov, head of the Russian Academy of Sciences since 1991
Photo: Yana Lapikova / RIA Novosti
Why ?
Because, when you are building a concrete product (rockets, machine, etc.), most of the organizational work – can be very difficult, but clear, in fact, technical. Here, the academic system is less agile than the one adopted in the Institute of Applied, “mailboxes”. But our system follows from the nature of scientific work. If a person in your field is a professional and respected, he will never be elected.
Ifall so good and democratic , s achem need reform ?
During hard times in the last fifteen – twenty years, new forms of support for science. Previously, they were not accepted in our country, but there were in the West – when scientists compete for the money. And this element should be improved. We have quite a lot of bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy that comes down from above, we do not have generated it. We need to simplify and speed up decision making. The modern world is very dynamic: if a scientist is late with the opening, then he loses the race. Very often, the Nobel Prize given by dates of articles with the difference in a month. Therefore, the challenge – to make the financial system less formal to the scientists themselves had more control of their scientific work. The entire organization of the Academy of Sciences should revolve around a scientist. And I’m going to achieve it.
A that it ? Order equipment ?
example. That’s the Max Planck Society in Germany, when you’re ordering equipment, it is delivered within a maximum of two weeks. And if the equipment is standard, then the next day may bring. We can also wait a very long time. Such problems are many and need to ask themselves the scientists who work in laboratories, how to help them. Make life a scientist, that he was engaged in science and not distracted by extraneous.
Soit in country need change laws , and not in Academy .
Something in the country. For example, the parable of the town – FL-94 (Federal Law on Public Procurement. – “PP”). Any public procurement should I pass through competitions, and this hampers the work. And there, in France or America, it is decided a phone call. As a result, we are not competitive.
Let’s continue on funding . I you in program lot of , on that need spend money : housing scientists , level salaries , upgrade equipment , application Science … AND in it same time you give schedule , on which total amount funding Academy of Sciences – about 60 billion rubles . If split on 95 thousand employees Academy , get about on 20 thousand dollars in year on man . It lot or little ?
This is not enough. Because in the United States to order more. And now we compete with their American counterparts in the open, the Iron Curtain is gone.
AND where take money ? you after no one not going to raise funding to ten time .
This is the task of the new leadership academy – to give suggestions to the government that you can implement. Properly filed idea today finds review. Take the “Skolkovo”, Nanotechnology Initiative, the program “Health”. But we have to be active all the time and offer new.
Why not do purely grant with istemu ?
No country is not working only grant system. Optimal to have a 30-40 per cent of the grants, the rest – basic funding. Here we are sitting here at the Institute, and if there was only a grant, we’ll be on the street on a bench talking. Infrastructure in basic research is expensive.
Let’s pro salary . You in program writing , that want do salary scientist twice above average in Region …
It’s not me – it’s Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, and I refer to it. This is an important initiative. And we spent at the Academy pilot project. Brought the average salary of researchers to 30000. And the people went into science. If Putin’s idea will be realized – and I’m sure it will be implemented – that, for example, in Moscow scientist salary will be about one hundred thousand. It will be a very strong result. By American standards, 36,000 dollars a year – a professorial rate.
You , with one hand , lot refer on guide country , to other – in your program features , to Sciences created strategy Development Russia . That have you priori think , that power it accept . On than based < strong> your confidence , that power need your strategy ? That , as now Investigation Committee took for « Skolkovo », like to convinces in back .
You know, we in the Russian government decided to treat critically. But we started talking to you with the simple things – a Marxist-Leninist thesis that the socio-economic system is promising if it higher labor productivity. Raise the productivity of multiple possible only on the basis of high technology. Today, the leadership of this understanding is. I have no doubt that Putin and the people who work with him, they want the good. They want to go down in history as the people who made the breakthrough.
task – to make the funding system is very informal, so that the scientists would be better equipped to manage their academic work
A who will design a strategy ?
Academy of Sciences as well. There has to be a human, and natural-science sector. Since we are talking about a high-tech sectors, they are determined by science, technology. Scientists have to offer, you need to put the emphasis. Well, for example, life sciences, medicine – what you need to navigate through ten – fifteen years? This is a task for the whole academy. After another such organization in the country there is no where under one roof you will find experts in all scientific matters.
I not understood . A where take money on strategy Development ?
Money with excess! If you pay close attention to the statements of our leaders, that in fact they are constantly saying, “we will find the money, give ideas.” There is a hunger for ideas. And that’s what I think the Academy and must deal with. Here’s academic Nekipelova Commission is preparing a report on the economy. Academic Glazev offers interesting things. There are other interesting approaches.
lot of talk about the assessment of a scientist. You also talk about it. Offering something other than a citation indexes?
citation index (the number of references to published scientific work in scientific journals. – “PP”) – a worldwide practice. And as if this criterion we may belong, from it can not escape. In many countries, science – is a massive area of ??human activity. This is an industry employing millions of people. To manage such a complex system, you need to create a formalized approach. And that created it – for example, in the form of citation index. This system has drawbacks. But it works in the world. The first question is, when a person comes into the manager’s office and asking for a job: “What’s your citation index? Did you even wrote at least one article? “This is a kind of rough frame that fits over the picture, and then goes detail. It uses other criteria. For example, expert assessment in the form of individual experts’ opinions.
The academy funding depends on how you cite?
Today there
directly. However, any evaluation system apparently have entered.
last question to you personally for what should be the president of Russian Academy of Sciences? You have a lot of ideas, and you’ll be working, writing articles. We see that you are interested. You do not be such an opportunity, if you become president.
It was the most difficult question for me. I like to do science in a variety of its forms: lectures, writing books. On the other hand, when you sit in this chair, all of this will be difficult to do, then do not have any illusions. But I am an enthusiast of the Academy. I believe that this is the best place to study fundamental science. I owe a lot to the academy, and in a sense it is the duty of this system.
- Does Russia need a resignation of the Minister of Economics
- Revenue Service has got
No comments:
Post a Comment