Deepmala 20 – Rewarding the Risk Takers

Knowledge without innovation is of no value. It is through the process of innovation alone that knowledge is converted into wealth and social good, and this process takes place from firm to farm. When one looks at India today, one feels that centuries of subjugation has perhaps undermined our capacity for innovation and creativity. We cannot anymore allow the ‘I’ in India to stand for imitation and inhibition, it must stand for innovation. Innovators are those who do not know that it cannot be done. Innovators are those who see what everyone else sees, but think of what no one else thinks. Innovators refuse status quo, they convert inspirations into solutions and ideas into products. Building such innovators will require an all-pervasive attitudinal change towards life and work – a shift from a culture of drift to a culture of dynamism, from a culture of idle prattle to a culture of thought and work, from diffidence to confidence, from despair to hope. Revival of Indian creativity and the innovative spirit needs to be made into a national movement today, in the same spirit and on the same scale as marked our freedom struggle.

Risk taking must become a part of the innovation policy of firms. Innovative institutions have no place for those who preserve the systems in a pre-fabricated and unaltered way. A friend of mine, who is a CEO of a company from abroad, once said ‘we do not shoot people, who make mistakes. We shoot people who do not take risks. What do you do?’ I said, ‘In India, we shoot people, who take risks!

Just as scientists and technologists are risk averse so are in the institutional systems. One must seriously look at the scope of innovation in government institutions and laboratories, which are risk averse. In fact, it is more often than not that such institutions are run by rules and regulations than by objectives. The system of S&T audit in our laboratories needs an urgent relook. One must understand that manufacturing and S&T are two different endeavours, culturally and operationally. In manufacturing, we look for zero defects and no failures, whereas in science, there is a fundamental right to fail.

I remember after taking over CSIR, I started what was called as the ‘New Idea Fund’. What was my motivation? In science, only two people are remembered, those who say the first word or those who say the last word. In Indian science, we have not done it often enough. Why? Because we have not taken risks and learned to dare, to stretch, to exceed the limits of the possible and that of the logical. My motivation was to challenge the CSIR. I invited the entire chain of laboratories to submit ideas, which had explosive creativity, and where the chance of success may be even one in thousand. During the last 4 years we have received over 300 new ideas but we have funded only 6 of them; we are so tough on our criteria on what constitutes explosive creativity. This initiative has spurred high level innovation in CSIR and even individual laboratories are setting up such funds now. However, when I first introduced this fund, I remember a well meaning friend mentioning to me that this is going to be an excellent fodder for audit, because by definition you are supporting failure rather than success!

I must say that there is a fundamental cultural change that is required in supporting risk takers, be they social workers, journalists, industrialists or scientists. Then only can be build an innovative India of our dreams.

Deepmala 19 – Innovations in Laboratories of Life

Many societies in the developing world have nurtured and refined systems of knowledge of their own. They include knowledge in the areas of geology, ecology, botany, agriculture, physiology and health. They are based on empirical observations made in the ‘laboratories of life’ rather than formal scientific institutions. They have emerged from centuries of efforts by communities. We are now seeing the emergence of terms such as ‘parallel’, ‘indigenous’ and civilizational’ knowledge systems to describe this body of knowledge.

Such parallel knowledge systems are expressions of diverse ways to the acquisition and production of knowledge. Indigenous knowledge and innovation systems must be sustained through active support to the societies that are keepers of this knowledge, their ways of life, their languages; their social organization and the environments in which they live.

Finally, we must bring benefits to those who innovated in the “laboratories of life”. An experience in India is worth sharing. It relates to a medicine that is based on the active ingredient in a plant, trichopus zeylanicus, found in the tropical forests of southwestern India and collected by the Kani tribal people. Scientists at the Tropical Botanic Garden and Research Institute (TBGRI) in Kerala learned of the tonic, which is claimed to bolster the immune system and provide additional energy, while on an expedition with the Kani in 1987. These scientists isolated and tested the ingredient and incorporated it into a compound, which they christened “Jeevani”, the giver of life. The tonic is now being manufactured by a major Ayurvedic drug company in Kerala. In 1995, an agreement was struck for the institute and the tribal community to share a license fee and 2% of net profits. This marks perhaps the first time that for intellectual property held by a tribe, a compensation in the form of cash benefits has gone directly to the source of the intellectual property holders. We need to multiply such examples globally.

Indigenous knowledge is a living cultural heritage. It transforms and adapts as it is transmitted from generation to generation. There is a need for greater awareness about the cultural relationships between various knowledge systems. Indigenous knowledge systems must be sustained through active support to the societies that are keepers of this knowledge, their ways of life, their languages; their social organization and the environments in which they live.

There is a clear need for systematic and in-depth analysis of the parallelism of insights between indigenous and civilizational knowledge systems, on the one hand, and certain areas of modern science concerned with fundamental aspects, on the other. In particular, a strong linkage between the indigenous knowledge holders and scientists is needed to explore the relationship between different knowledge systems. For instance, there is a tremendous scope to develop eco-technologies based upon appropriate blends of traditional wisdom and modern science. Some of the greatest opportunities are provided, especially in the Indian context, in the area of traditional medicine. If we build on those, then ‘Indian System of Medicine’ can become ‘Universal System of Medicine’.

Deepmala 18 – Springs of Scientific Creativity

What are the key ingredients in scientific creativity? It is the ability to recognise and pose, rather than merely solve, high-level problems. For example, James Watson felt sure that it was going to be possible to discover the molecular nature of the gene and worked hard at it- even to such an extent that he was fired from the Rockefeller Fellowship that he had. Einstein has been quoted as saying that, when he was 15 years old, he asked himself what would the world look like if [he] were moving with the velocity of light.

Complexity and heterogeneity are also major barriers to recognising problems. The genius of Newton was in recognizing that a ball thrown in the air and a planet circling the sun are “the same” with respect to gravity. He made the further crucial abstraction of treating his objects as point masses, reducing the complexity to a minimum. These abstractions and simplifications of Newton are, in reality, simple, but only after the fact. As we look back on great scientific discoveries, many of them seem childishly simple to us. The great innovation of Galileo was to avoid trying to explain why objects fall (as Aristotle had) in favor of quantifying how they fall.

There are many hurdles in India today, which hamper scientific creativity. One of them is overemphasis on becoming an expert. The expert is many times in the danger of developing the small cage habit. Zoo animals, when moved to a larger cage, may continue to pace about an area the size and shape of their old smaller cage. The danger in becoming an expert is that one tends to build one’s own cage out of the certainties and facts which one gradually comes to know. Dogmatism builds cages in which the dogmatic then live and expect everyone else to live also.

Most people can learn to be far more creative than they are. Our Indian school system emphasizes single correct answers and provides few opportunities for exploratory learning, problem solving, or innovation. Science becomes a textbook exercise of learning definitions rather than one of discovery. All this must change if we wish to bring the very best of scientific creativity in Indian science.

The ability to see what everyone else sees but thinks of what no one else thinks is the hallmark of a great scientist. Everyone saw that the sea was blue, but only Sir C.V. Raman thought of what no one else thought.

This ability brought Sir C.V. Raman the distinction of becoming the only Indian scientist to win a Nobel Prize in the twentieth century for work done in India. We hope that we will recapture that spirit of inquiry, which we had in the millennia that have gone by, and create several Ramans in the twenty first century.

Deepmala 17 – The Art of Science

Science is an exploration of the nature of reality, both inside and outside us. The empahsis here is on things which are quantifiable and measurable, theories which can be tested and demonstrated and facts which can be observed and verified by others. Is there something called art of science? Are these attributes of artistic creativity present in scientific endeavours also? Science has been considered to be a meeting place of two kinds of poetry; the poetry of action and the poetry of thought.

That Science admits aesthetic criteria just like the arts, has been expressed by a number of great scientists and mathematicians. The quest for beauty in science has found excellent expression in the writings of our own astrophysicist, Chandrasekhar. While examining the question as to the extent to which the quest for beauty is an aim in the pursuit of science, Chandrasekhar quotes Poincare. “The scientist does not study nature because it is useful to do so. He studies it because he takes pleasure in it; and he takes pleasure in it because it is beautiful. I mean the intimate beauty which comes from the harmonious order of its parts and which a pure intelligence can grasp… It is because simplicity and vastness are both beautiful that we seek by preference simple facts and vast facts; that we take delight, now in following the giant courses of the stars, now in scrutinizing with a microscope that prodigious smallness which is also a vastness, and, now in seeking in geological ages the traces of the past that attracts us because of its remoteness”.

The place of beauty in mathematical equations has been explained by Diracs a long time ago, but we cannot limit beauty to equations alone. There is beauty in the architecture of molecules and materials as well as in the pathways of transformations. There is beauty even in the way science works and develops.

The scientist who develops a theory or designs an experiment is no less creative than the artist who produces a parting or sculpture. Artists and scientists share certain common motivations. These include, among other things, a desire to make a positive contribution to the welfare of humanity as well as a sensitivity to aesthetics in their work, although their criteria for “beauty” may be quite different. Both Artists and Scientists seek a sense of order in the natural world. Scientists and artists are driven by a strong desire to interpret nature or the natural world. Nature has been one of the main sources of artistic inspiration for as long as humans have made art, an example being the paintings applied to cave walls, which were perhaps the first instance of the interweaving of art and science.

While their activities may differ, scientists and artists share one essential component in their work. Both are noted for a certain impatience or uneasiness with the conventional demands of social interaction, preferring to toil in comparative solitude in the sanctuary of the studio or the lab.

Imagination plays a vital part in both science and art, but in science it has certain constraints. As stated by Feynman, ‘whatever we are allowed to imagine in science has to be consistent with everything else that we know. The problem of creating something which is new, but which is consistent with everything which has been seen before, is one of extreme difficulty’. At the same time, the difficulty with science is often not with the new ideas, but in escaping the old ones. A certain amount of irreverence is essential for creative pursuit in science, which is the case in the art also.

The thinking man has always had a compulsive occupation with unfettered Intellectual explorations to satisfy his philosophical urges. Science is one of those urges. As an intellectual effort, science cannot be regarded as something apart. It is an important part of our culture. Science permeates our thinking today and it would be incorrect to completely separate it from what we normally refer to as humanities and social sciences. Natural science does not simply describe or explain Nature. It is a part of an interplay between nature and man. As Heisenberg has said, ‘Science describes nature as exposed to our method of questioning’. Our educational systems in the new century must be designed by fully understanding the nuances of this subtle dynamics.

Deepmala 16 – Women and S&T

In India, approximately 50% of our population is women. In this new century of knowledge, with all pervasive advances in S&T affecting human lives profoundly, it is pertinent to ask as to what Indian women could do for S&T and what S&T could do for women?

Harsh statistics stares us in the face. 70% of the Indian women are illiterate. 90% of family planning operations are tubectomies. 60% of primary school dropouts are girls. Sharp gender inequalities with unequal pay for equal work, discrimination in labour market and so on are grim realities.

Although academically, women have excelled in the last decade or so in practicality all the disciplines of science, women are grossly unrepresented in science and technology in India at various levels. Some estimates show that around 90% of the science degree holders in pure science are women, but only 8% in medicine and around 3% in engineering and technology are women. The major choice of the subject for women scientists continues to be life science.

The emerging technological developments have the potential to impact the lives of the women enormously. The emergence of information technology will play a great role with education reaching the home now, with access of women to higher education becoming easier. The same flexibilities are available for working too. The emerging IT connectivity offers the women the freedom to work from home and at hours that suit them. Home and office have ceased to be contrary pulls. However, in order that women benefit fully from the IT revolution, we will have to make fundamental changes in the archaic employment rules with a far more liberal view of the work place, work function and working hours.

Advances in life sciences have placed in the hands of women opportunities that were unheard of earlier. We must promote vigorously pro-women technologies. These exist in their creative participation in agriculture linked activities, micro-propagation, plant tissue culture, disease surveillance, health care systems and so on. Developing and enhancing a woman’s entrepreneurial skills and giving her economic freedom will alone restore her to the rightful place in the family and the society.

At the most fundamental level, we will have to focus on improving the female literacy rate; ensuring equal access of girls to existing school facilities; minimizing the dropout of girl students; encouraging the participation of girls and women in existing technical training and vocational training programmes; and increasing educational and particularly scientific and technical training facilities for girls and women.

A review and revision of the present curriculum and textbooks at both the primary and secondary level should be undertaken to introduce programmes and activities designed to overcome the women students’ fear and anxiety frequently associated with science and mathematics, to present positive images of women engaged in problem-solving and inventive roles, and to introduce materials more in line with a country’s development needs, with particular attention to the role of women within the process.

India of the twenty first century has to stand on two legs. The issue of Women and S&T, therefore, assumes even a greater significance.

Deepmala 15 – Environment and the Technological Challenge

In the characteristically integrative Indian tradition, equity, environment, ecology and economics will have to be viewed, not in isolation, but in tandem with each other. Environment will have to be viewed as a unique national asset in the next millennium. The study of the relationship between the land use and soil processes, mechanisms of global environment change, industry-environment interaction, prediction of our environment particularly with respect to human impact, will require innovative tools of science and technology.

In the new millennium, the old ideas of quantitative growth must give way to the idea of qualitative growth within the limits of the ecosystems. The key question is how do we reconcile the developmental goals with ecological capabilities? Promotion of environmentally sound technologies warrants large scale technological substitution towards environmentally-benign technologies. Emphasis on biotechnology for substitution of non-renewable with renewable resource base would move the chempresent to biofuture. Restructuring of the economy by substituting environmentally harmful endeavours with equally productive but environmentally comparible ones could form an important strategy in the economic policy.

We also need a change in our systems of valuation as well as value systems. For instance, we are well used to the conventional indicators of economic growth measured in terms of Gross National Product, Gross Domestic Product, etc. Should we not think in terms of new indicators such as Gross Natural Product or even Gross Ecological Product? Such indicators will not only themselves measure growth but be indicative of ecologically-sound structural changes in economy.

Deepmala 14 – Green Revolution to Gene Revolution

At a point of time in our history, we went to the western world with a begging bowl for food. Then came the green revolution. It was not merely the innovation by agricultural scientists. Innovative extension models, participation of farmers in the innovation movement and so on were responsible for its success. Indeed a positive policy support, liberal public funding for agricultural research and development and dedicated work of farmers contributed to its success. But what about the future? We have the daunting task of feeding almost 1.5 billion people with about 350 millions tons of food grains by 2040. The increased production has to be attained with minimal ecological damage, falling per capita arable land, less irrigation water and less fossil fuel based energy sources. This needs an innovative blending of technology and experience. Here, on the one hand, we will need to deploy cutting-edge advances in modern biotechnology, space technology, information technology and renewable energy technology; on the other hand, we will need to take cognizance of the best in India’s traditional agricultural wisdom and prudence.

It is only through the blending of the “gene revolution” with our experience in the ‘green revolution’, that we can reach our goal of ‘evergreen revolution’ and also ‘nutritional revolution’. The advantage of the gene revolution is that it is relatively scale neutral, and therefore, in principle, it should benefit the big and small farmers alike. It can also reduce a farmer’s dependency on chemical inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers.

Sir Francis Bacon had once said: “It would be an unsound fancy to expect that things which have never yet been done can be done except by methods which have never been tried”. We therefore require a new approach. Let us move boldly on finding these new approaches with an open mind and a sense of purpose.

Deepmala 13 – Indian Science and Technology in the 21st Century

Our policy on science and technology would have to be directed along five lines. The first priority will be to use the great powers of science and technology to meet the basic human needs particularly taking note of locale-specific situations; these would relate to food, health, water, energy, employment, shelter etc. The second would be to use science and technology to create wealth, both by enterprises as well as by individual Indian entrepreneurs. The third would be to embark on a major thrust in emerging knowledge based areas such as informatics, biotechnology, new and renewable energy sources, new materials and environment-related programmes. In all of these. India can make a major headway and surge ahead of the rest of the world and use this position to its advantage in the global technological scenario. The fourth relates to strategic areas, where for love or for money, technologies will not be available to us. This would involve nuclear energy, defence research and space science and technologies. Fortunately, we have built self-reliance and enormous capabilities over the past few decades in all these areas.

What is our stock-in-trade? The world acknowledges the high calibre of Indian scientists, engineers and technologies. The obvious proof of this is the fact that while products of few other Indian enterprises command international prestige and price, the products of our higher educational institutions are in great demand internationally. The contribution of Indians to the growth of science and technology in developed countries has been widely appreciated. Can we not then garner all these energies and contribute to building the new India in a TEAM INDIA spirit? We certainly can. But for this to happen will also need to ensure that the finest minds, who seek to work on what excites them most, are provided with the environment and opportunity to pursue their interests with the fullest zeal. The government has the prime responsibility to create a great leveraging by using the large base of highly trained manpower created by its institutions of higher learning. The Indian hopes of the next millennium will have to be pinned on this rich resource.

Deepmala 12 – Economic of Traditional Knowledge

The issue of economics based on traditional knowledge and biodiversity are complex. India, with approximately 8% of world’s biodiversity and as one of the greatest storehouses of traditional knowledge, has the potential of becoming a major player in the global trade in herbs-based formulations, medicines and products. An estimate by the EXIM Bank puts the international market of medicinal plants – related trade at US $60 billion per year growing at about 7% annually. India has only 2.5%shareof this market.

Knowledge-rich companies and researchers from the developed world have been attracted to the wealth the poorer countries have in their biodiversity and the traditional knowledge systems. Some argue that the access to such biodiversity and community knowledge by the industrially developed nations is necessary for the larger welfare of mankind as this advances knowledge and leads to new products which contribute to the well being of global consumers. However, this is not the point. The point is that this access to the resources of the poor does not benefit them in any way, while their natural resource and intellectual property continues to be appropriated and exploited.

Many researchers who have obtained knowledge about biodiversity and its uses from local innovators, communities and institutions do not even acknowledge their contributions, let alone sharing of the benefits resulting from such knowledge. One recalls here the case of a new antibiotic. This was launched in the USA based on the discovery of peptides in from skin by a researcher who had found three tribes in Africa and America, which knew about the wound healing capabilities of the frog skin and were using it for that purpose. However, not benefit was given to the tribes. We need to reach are understanding between the capital rich and biodiversity rich countries to share the benefits for a common good of the making.

Deepmala 11 – Need for Rethinking on Patents

There are several areas of conflict and debate in the existing patenting system. One issue is that of public vs. private knowledge. Some types of knowledge – for example educational technologies, life saving technologies, must be available to all, not just to the rich. We need to develop principles by which we determine as to when the knowledge will be publicly available and when it will be kept private. Agencies should be set up to buy knowledge for the public good, including by using those principles used in land-acquisition proceedings – but this requires a clear legal and policy framework. The recent crisis in the HIV/AIDS case in South Africa has brought this issue to a global attention.

The industrial property systems were set up centuries ago for inanimate objects, and that too in formal systems of innovations. A great challenge is now emerging to look at the systems that will deal with animate objects (such as plants an animals) and with informal systems innovations )such as those by grass root innovators like farmers, artisans, tribes, fishermen and so on). The standard intellectual property system will certainly not suit such innovators and their innovations. We need innovation in the intellectual property system itself. Shorter duration patents for smaller innovations, including specific improvements in the traditional knowledge need to be conceived. They will involve simple registration-cum-petty patent system where the inventive threshold would be lower but even a small improvement in material, product or use could be protected at much lesser costs an for shorter duration. This will give a boost to the creative capabilities of otherwise deprived innovators. We, in India, will have to develop our own models of hits. This is particularly important, since only 6% of India is matriculate. But the remaining 94% of India is also innovative. We need to create our own systems to recognise their innovations.